Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38194881›Full record

ArticleESMO open2024

Prognostic value of deep learning-derived body composition in advanced pancreatic cancer-a retrospective multicenter study.

J Keyl, A Bucher, F Jungmann, R Hosch, A Ziller, R Armbruster, P Malkomes, T M Reissig, S Koitka, I Tzianopoulos and 17 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in ESMO open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Pancreatic cancer and sarcopenia: a narrative review of the current status.International journal of clinical oncology · 2024
    Review
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

27 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

J KeylInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany. Electronic address: Julius.Keyl@uk-essen.de.
A BucherInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Frankfurt partner site, Heidelberg, Germany.
F JungmannInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany; Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Medicine, School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
R HoschInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany.
A ZillerInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany; Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Medicine, School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
R ArmbrusterInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
P MalkomesDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
T M ReissigDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner site University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Bridge Institute of Experimental Tumor Therapy, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; Division of Solid Tumor Translational Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK Partner Site Essen) and German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany.
S KoitkaInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany.
I TzianopoulosDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Bridge Institute of Experimental Tumor Therapy, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; Division of Solid Tumor Translational Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK Partner Site Essen) and German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany.
P KeylInstitute of Pathology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
K KostbadeDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
D AlbersDepartment of Gastroenterology, Elisabeth Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
P MarkusDepartment of General Surgery and Traumatology, Elisabeth Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
J TreckmannWest German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
K NassensteinInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
J HauboldInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
M MakowskiInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
M ForstingGerman Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner site University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
H A BabaInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
S KasperDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner site University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
J T SivekeDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner site University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Bridge Institute of Experimental Tumor Therapy, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; Division of Solid Tumor Translational Oncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK Partner Site Essen) and German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
F NensaInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner site University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
M SchulerDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT West, Essen, Germany.
G KaissisInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany; Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Medicine, School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
J KleesiekInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner site University Hospital Essen (AöR), Essen, Germany; Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
R BrarenInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Munich partner site, Heidelberg, Germany.
Essen University Hospital · DETechnical University of Munich · DEUniversity of Duisburg-Essen · DEGoethe University Frankfurt · DEDeutschen Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung · DEElisabeth-Krankenhaus Essen · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DEHeidelberg University · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DENational Center for Tumor Diseases · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the prognostic relevance of cachexia in pancreatic cancer, individual body composition has not been routinely integrated into treatment planning. In this multicenter study, we investigated the prognostic value of sarcopenia and myosteatosis automatically extracted from routine computed tomography (CT) scans of patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PATIENTS AND

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed clinical imaging data of 601 patients from three German cancer centers. We applied a deep learning approach to assess sarcopenia by the abdominal muscle-to-bone ratio (MBR) and myosteatosis by the ratio of abdominal inter- and intramuscular fat to muscle volume. In the pooled cohort, univariable and multivariable analyses were carried out to analyze the association between body composition markers and overall survival (OS). We analyzed the relationship between body composition markers and laboratory values during the first year of therapy in a subgroup using linear regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage.

resultsDeep learning-derived MBR [hazard ratio (HR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.77, P < 0.005] and myosteatosis (HR 3.73, 95% CI 1.66-8.39, P < 0.005) were significantly associated with OS in univariable analysis. In multivariable analysis, MBR (P = 0.019) and myosteatosis (P = 0.02) were associated with OS independent of age, sex, and AJCC stage. In a subgroup, MBR and myosteatosis were associated with albumin and C-reactive protein levels after initiation of therapy. Additionally, MBR was also associated with hemoglobin and total protein levels.

conclusionsOur work demonstrates that deep learning can be applied across cancer centers to automatically assess sarcopenia and myosteatosis from routine CT scans. We highlight the prognostic role of our proposed markers and show a strong relationship with protein levels, inflammation, and anemia. In clinical practice, automated body composition analysis holds the potential to further personalize cancer treatment.

Indexed as

Deep LearningPancreatic NeoplasmsSarcopeniaBody CompositionHumansMuscle, SkeletalPrognosisRetrospective Studiesbody compositioncomputed tomographydeep learningpancreatic cancerprognosis

Identifiers

PMID38194881
PMCPMC10837775
OpenAlexW4390661308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.