Are computed tomography-based measures of specific abdominal muscle groups predictive of adverse outcomes in older cancer patients?

PURPOSE: It is unknown whether computed tomography (CT)-based total abdominal muscle measures are representative of specific abdominal muscle groups and whether analysis of specific abdominal muscle groups are predictive of the risk of adverse outcomes in older cancer patients. METHODS: Retrospective single-center cohort study in elective colon cancer patients aged ≥65 years. CT-based skeletal muscle (SM) surface area, muscle density and intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT) surface area were determined for rectus abdominis; external- and internal oblique and transversus abdominis (lateral muscles); psoas; and erector spinae and quadratus lumborum (back muscles). Outcomes were defined as severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo score >2) and long-term survival (median follow-up 5.2 years). RESULTS: 254 older colon cancer patients were included (median 73.6 years, 62.2% males). Rectus abdominis showed the lowest SM surface area and muscle density and the back muscles showed the highest IMAT surface area. Psoas muscle density, and lateral muscle density and percentage IMAT were associated with severe postoperative complications independent of gender, age and cancer stage. CONCLUSIONS: CT-based total abdominal muscle quantity and quality do not represent the heterogeneity that exists between specific muscle groups. The potential added value of analysis of specific muscle groups in predicting adverse outcomes in older (colon) cancer patients should be further addressed in prospective studies.

Single Physical Performance Measures Cannot Identify Geriatric Outpatients with Sarcopenia.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia is highly prevalent in the older population and is associated with several adverse health outcomes. Equipment to measure muscle mass and muscle strength to diagnose sarcopenia is often unavailable in clinical practice due to the related expenses while an easy physical performance measure to identify individuals who could potentially have sarcopenia is lacking. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the association between physical performance measures and definitions of sarcopenia in a clinically relevant population of geriatric outpatients. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional study was conducted, consisting of 140 community-dwelling older adults that were referred to a geriatric outpatient clinic. No exclusion criteria were applied. MEASUREMENTS: Physical performance measures included balance tests (side-by-side, semi-tandem and tandem test with eyes open and -closed), four-meter walk test, timed up and go test, chair stand test, handgrip strength and two subjective questions on mobility. Direct segmental multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis was used to measure muscle mass. Five commonly used definitions of sarcopenia were applied. Diagnostic accuracy was determined by sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve. RESULTS: Physical performance measures, i.e. side-by-side test, tandem test, chair stand test and handgrip strength, were associated with at least one definition of sarcopenia. Diagnostic accuracy of these physical performance measures was poor. CONCLUSIONS: Single physical performance measures could not identify older individuals with sarcopenia, according to five different definitions of sarcopenia.

Do older individuals who are diagnosed with cancer have worse physical performance prior to diagnosis compared to matched controls? A longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Impaired physical performance is highly prevalent in older cancer patients and is associated with cancer-related outcomes such as mortality and chemotherapy-related toxicity. Physical performance might already decline prior to the cancer diagnosis due to undiagnosed disease. This study aimed to assess whether the physical performance of community-dwelling individuals prior to cancer diagnosis is worse compared to matched controls who are not diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: The study sample was selected from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam, a longitudinal study on a nationally representative sample of the Dutch older population. Physical performance of initially cancer-free individuals aged 55-84 years who were diagnosed with cancer during 10 or 20 years of follow-up was compared to the physical performance of controls who were not diagnosed with cancer. For controls, the physical performance measurements of the cycle with a median age closest to the cancer group were used. The time interval between physical performance measurements and the report of cancer was 2 to 4 years. Groups were compared using logistic and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The study sample included 1735 individuals with a median age of 68.7 [interquartile range 63.3-76.4] years. During follow-up, 414 (23.9%) individuals were diagnosed with cancer. Handgrip strength, gait speed, chair stand ability, chair stand test time and ability to put on and take off a cardigan did not differ between groups. Individuals prior to cancer diagnosis were more likely to complete the tandem balance test. CONCLUSIONS: Physical performance of individuals 2 to 4 years prior to report of cancer diagnosis is not lower compared to controls. This suggests that physical performance may not be influenced by cancer before diagnosis.