Observational studyBMC cancer2025
Risk of sarcopenia in women with breast cancer: a comparative analysis of screening tools.
Observational study in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The relationship between sarcopenia and breast cancer: mechanistic pathways and clinical relevance.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Retrospective Analysis of the Association Between Sarcopenia and Fall Risk in Older Breast Cancer Patients Using Real World Data (TriNetX).Cancer medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSarcopenia is characterized by the loss of muscle strength and mass and is associated with poorer clinical outcomes in women with breast cancer. However, no specific tool is capable of assessing the risk of sarcopenia in this population. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare the performance of SARC-F, SARC-CalF, and BMI-adjusted SARC-CalF as screening tools for the risk of sarcopenia in women with breast cancer.
methodsAn observational cross-sectional study was conducted involving women with breast cancer diagnosed in the previous 12 months. The risk of sarcopenia was identified by SARC-F, SARC-CalF, and BMI-adjusted SARC-CalF. As proposed by the EWGSOP2, sarcopenia was defined as low muscle strength (grip strength: <23.0 kg) and appendicular skeletal muscle mass index < 6.38 kg/m
resultsThis study included 168 women with a mean age of 54.8 ± 11.3 years. The prevalence of sarcopenia risk ranged from 10.1 to 36.6%, depending on the screening tool employed. The prevalence of sarcopenia was 8.3%. Using the presence of sarcopenia as reference, the SARC-F had an AUC of 0.550 [(0.396-0.703) p = 0.54], sensitivity of 21.4%, and specificity of 85.7%; the SARC-CalF had an AUC of 0.790 [(0.654-0.927) p < 0.001], sensitivity of 42.8%, and specificity of 92.2%; the BMI-adjusted SARC-CalF had an AUC of 0.521 [(0.385-0.658) p = 0.08], sensitivity of 28.6%, and specificity of 63.0%. Therefore, the SARC-CalF tool had low sensitivity and high specificity.
conclusionSARC-CalF performed the best compared to the alternatives provided. However, based on the current results, it may be necessary to reconsider the use of either of these instruments as a screening option for sarcopenia risk in women with breast cancer.
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.