Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
In Vivo
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
In Vivo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit iiar on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Curative Radiotherapy in Elderly Patients With Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: The Prognostic Role of Sarcopenia

GIANLUCA FERINI, ALBERTO CACCIOLA, SILVANA PARISI, SARA LILLO, LAURA MOLINO, CONSUELO TAMBURELLA, VALERIO DAVI, ILENIA NAPOLI, ANGELO PLATANIA, NICOLA SETTINERI, GIUSEPPE IATI, ANTONIO PONTORIERO, STEFANO PERGOLIZZI and ANNA SANTACATERINA
In Vivo January 2021, 35 (1) 571-578; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12293
GIANLUCA FERINI
1REM Radioterapia srl, Catania, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ALBERTO CACCIOLA
2Radiation Oncology Unit – Department of Biomedical, Dental Science and Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SILVANA PARISI
3Fondazione Istituto Oncologico del Mediterraneo, Catania, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SARA LILLO
2Radiation Oncology Unit – Department of Biomedical, Dental Science and Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: saralillo93@hotmail.it
LAURA MOLINO
2Radiation Oncology Unit – Department of Biomedical, Dental Science and Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
CONSUELO TAMBURELLA
2Radiation Oncology Unit – Department of Biomedical, Dental Science and Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
VALERIO DAVI
2Radiation Oncology Unit – Department of Biomedical, Dental Science and Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ILENIA NAPOLI
2Radiation Oncology Unit – Department of Biomedical, Dental Science and Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ANGELO PLATANIA
4Radiation Oncology Unit – Papardo Hospital, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
NICOLA SETTINERI
4Radiation Oncology Unit – Papardo Hospital, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
GIUSEPPE IATI
5Radiation Oncology Unit, A.O.U. “G. Martino”, Messina, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ANTONIO PONTORIERO
5Radiation Oncology Unit, A.O.U. “G. Martino”, Messina, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
STEFANO PERGOLIZZI
2Radiation Oncology Unit – Department of Biomedical, Dental Science and Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy;
5Radiation Oncology Unit, A.O.U. “G. Martino”, Messina, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ANNA SANTACATERINA
4Radiation Oncology Unit – Papardo Hospital, Messina, Italy;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: To evaluate the impact of sarcopenia in muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) elderly patients submitted to curative radiotherapy. Patients and Methods: Patients received radiotherapy between 2013 and 2018, and the skeletal muscle index was calculated to classify them as sarcopenic or non-sarcopenic. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS), 90-day mortality and toxicity. Results: A total of 28 patients with a median age of 85 years met our inclusion criteria and 8 of them were sarcopenic. With a median prescribed dose of 61 Gy and a median follow-up of 24.5 months, OS rates in the sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic groups were 100% and 84.4% at 3 months, 57.1% and 56.6% at 12 months, 38.1% and 50.3% at 24 months and 38.1% and 33.5% at 48 months, respectively; the CSS rates were 100% and 94.1% at 3 months and 68.6% and 88.2% at 12, 24 and 48 months, respectively. The actuarial 90-day mortality rate was 17.9% for the whole cohort, and 20% and 12.5% for the non-sarcopenic and sarcopenic groups, respectively. The radio-induced toxicity was similar in both groups. Conclusion: Sarcopenia cannot be considered a negative prognostic factor for MIBC elderly patients treated with external beam radiotherapy. Irradiation is therefore a feasible and effective choice for these patients, especially if unfit for surgery.

  • Radiotherapy
  • sarcopenia
  • bladder cancer
  • elderly

In Italy, bladder carcinoma is the fourth most common cancer in males, with a lower incidence among women. Urothelial carcinoma mostly affects the elderly population that frequently has comorbidities and general performance decline (1).

Radical cystectomy currently represents the gold standard treatment in patients affected by muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), with a five-year overall survival rate between 42% and 58% after surgery and a significant mortality risk within the first 90 days that reached 9% in the larger case series of patients (2, 3). Some factors like multiple age-related comorbidities and a poor perfomance status can have a negative impact on patients’ ability to tolerate radical cystectomy (4), but also a suboptimal nutritional state can seriously put at risk the postoperative recovery even leading to death in some cases (5).

For a systematic assessment of comorbidities and perfomance status impact on the preoperative risk of radical cystectomy many indexes with poor reproducibility and therefore low reliability have been suggested (6), whereas regarding the nutritional state an objective evaluation can be made through general clinical assessment and some easily quantifiable measures of body composition. In this sense, the most used indexes are the body mass index, body surface area, appendicular skeletal muscle mass, total psoas area, psoas muscle volume, psoas muscle index and skeletal muscle index (5, 7-9).

Sarcopenia indicates the loss of muscle mass, and an exhaustive definition has been provided by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) (10). An excellent tool to evaluate sarcopenia is the skeletal muscle index (SMI), introduced by Fearon et al. and calculated on axial computed tomography (CT) images thus being poorly affected by the inter-operator variability (11). It has been shown that sarcopenia is a negative prognostic factor both for the overall survival (OS) and cancer specific survival (CSS) of patients affected by melanoma, and breast, pancreas, colorectal, hepatobiliary and small cell lung cancer (12-16). Furthermore, some authors have recently reported that sarcopenia significantly increases both overall and cancer-specific mortality rates in MIBC patients submitted to radical cystectomy (8, 17-19), thus paving the way to a wide spread of non-invasive treatments.

In this scenario, radiotherapy (RT) as part of a bi/trimodal approach including the transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB) with or without chemotherapy represents a valid alternative for all patients who refuse or are not suitable for surgical treatment due to comorbidities or unresectable tumor, as confirmed in other clinical scenarios (20-22).

Since muscolar mass loss is frequently correlated with age, the main purpose of the present study was to evaluate sarcopenic status in a cohort of elderly MIBC irradiated patients and to estimate its impact on treatment-related toxicity, 90-day mortality, OS and CSS.

Patients and Methods

Criteria for inclusion. All patients gave a written informed consent to the use of their anonymized clinical and image data for research and training purposes prior to treatment. The study was conducted in accordance with the general principles of “The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki)”. Data related to MIBC patients irradiated between April 2013 and August 2018 were retrospectively collected by searching in the database of the Radiation Oncology Units of “Policlinico Universitario G. Martino” and “Azienda Ospedaliera Papardo” of Messina. Only patients ≥70 years, unfit for surgical treatment or having refused it, with a MIBC TNM staging T≥2 N0 M0 and eligible for RT were recruited.

Imaging, clinical and sarcopenia assessment. To perform each patient’s muscular assessment, a single axial slice at the level of the body of L3 vertebra was extracted from the RT planning CT. The muscle area, expressed in cm2 and comprised the psoas, paraspinal muscles, transverse muscles, exterior and inner obliques, and rectus of the abdomen, was computed (Figure 1) and divided by the square of the body height expressed in meters to calculate the SMI.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Workflow of the computation of the muscular area (cm2). (A) CT slice passing through L3; (B) tissues with density between -30 and -190 HU corresponding to adipose tissue; (C) tissues with density between -29 and 150 HU corresponding to skeletal muscle; (D) manually processed image to rule out non-muscular tissues; (E) final result.

In detail, the analysis of L3-slice body composition was carried out assuming specific thresholds of Hounsfield Unit (HU) for the different represented tissues. The reference range was between -29 and 150 HU for the skeletal muscle (Figure 1C) and between -30 a -190 HU for the adipose tissue (Figure 1B), whereas the muscular area was finally calculated by automatically adding the related pixels (Figure 1D, E) and, if necessary, manual adjustments were made by the operator. According to the international consensus of cancer cachexia by Fearon et al., an SMI <55 cm2/m2 for men and <39 cm2/m2 for women was highly indicative of sarcopenic status (11).

Finally, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was calculated to estimate the impact of several coexisting comorbidities on patient’s survival.

RT and follow-up. Patients were irradiated within 4-6 weeks after a maximum TURB. CT simulation was performed with the patient placed in a supine position having an empty bladder and lower limbs immobilized through a specific immobilization system (knee-fix). Volumes to be treated were defined as follows: the gross tumor volume (GTV) included the macroscopic tumor clearly visible on CT simulation and MRI imaging if available, the clinical target volume (CTV) included the whole bladder excluding the negative limph nodes, and the planning target volume (PTV) derived from a radial expansion of 1.5 cm of the CTV in order to overcome setup bias and consider physiological bladder position variation from one RT session to another. The minimum reference isodose to cover PTV was 95%. Rectum, femoral heads and small bowel were defined as organs at risk, so that specific dose-volume constraints were fixed and a maximum of two constraints could be unrespected: rectum V50 <50%, V60 <33%; femoral head V42 <50%; small bowel V45 <195 ml and V35 <230 ml if the volume included both the whole peritoneal cavity and the intestinal loops, V15 <120 ml with Dmax <55.5 Gy in case only the intestinal loops included.

RT was delivered with a 6-10 MV linear accelerator adopting different irradiation techniques including 3D-conformal RT (3D-CRT), intensity modulated RT (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). A 50 Gy dose was delivered to the CTV with a dose of 60 Gy, and in some cases slightly above, on GTV, through 2-Gy daily fractions and a weekly schedule (5 days/week). Set-up check was carried out through cone-beam CT or EPID.

All patients were provided with a supportive therapy during all the irradiation time, including intestinal probiotics and urinary antiseptics in addition to dietary advices.

Acute toxicities, evaluated according to the RTOG scale, were weekly registered during and after treatment contextually to the 3-, 6- and every 4-month follow-up visits. Treatment response has been evaluated through CT and/or cystoscopy at 8 weeks after the end of RT.

Statistical analysis. The primary endpoints of the present study were: 1) OS, defined as the time interval between the start of the RT and the date of death or, for alive patients, of the last follow-up and evaluated at fixed time points of 3, 12, 24 and 48 months; 2) CSS, defined as the time interval between the start of the RT and the date of death due to cancer evaluated at fixed time intervals of 3, 12, 24 and 48 months; 3) 90-day mortality, defined as the death rate at 90 days after the start of RT relative to the total number of patients that underwent the treatment. These three outcomes were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and all the results were considered significant if p-value was lower than 0.05.

Results

According to the selection criteria, we identified 28 MIBC patients with a median age of 85 years (range=71-90 years). One patient received pre-RT chemotherapy administered systemically and one patient received concomitant chemoradiotherapy. All patients were previously submitted to an as wide as possible TURB that provided a histological classification of the tumor which resulted in the diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma in 26/28 cases and a squamous carcinoma in 2/28 cases; an infiltration beyond the detrusor muscle (T4) was detected in only one case. Comorbidity burden was assessed by the CCI obtaining a median score of 8 (range=5-16). A complete list of the characteristics of the irradiated patients is provided in Table I.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Patient and tumor characteristics.

The RT delivered was a 3D-CRT in 13/28 patients, an IMRT in 14/28 patients and a VMAT in 1/28 patient. The total median dose was 61 Gy (range=29.1-69.6 Gy) achieved through an average daily dose of 210.9 cGy, and the median follow-up time was 24.5 months (range=3-64 months). Only in two cases dysuria was so severe to cause the interruption of the planned schedule. Median SMI was 72.4 cm2/m2 (range=42.9-94.2 cm2/m2), and 8 of the 28 enrolled patients were sarcopenic.

At the last follow-up 14/28 patients had died, 13/28 were alive, and 1/28 was lost to follow-up. Median OS of the whole cohort was 12 months (range=3-60 months), and no substantial differences emerged comparing the median OS rates of the sarcopenic and the non-sarcopenic groups (15 vs. 42 months, respectively). For the whole sample, OS rates at 3, 12, 24 and 48 months were 88.6%, 56.8%, 47.3% and 35.5% respectively, whereas for the aforementioned groups the OS rates at the same time intervals were 100% vs. 84.4%, 57.1% vs. 56.6%, 38.1% vs. 50.3%, 38.1% vs. 33.5%, respectively (Figure 2). Only in 4 out of 13 dead patients, exitus was caused by cancer progression; of them, 2 were sarcopenic and 2 were non-sarcopenic. CSS rates at 3, 12, 24 and 48 months were 95.8% at the first interval of time and 82.9% at the remaining three. Comparing the sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic groups, the CSS rates were 100% vs. 94.1% at 3 months, and 68.6% vs. 88.2% at 12, 24 and 48 months, respectively (Figure 2). Finally, the actuarial 90-day mortality rate was 17.9% for the whole sample, and 20% vs. 12.5% for the non-sarcopenic and sarcopenic groups respectively (Figure 2).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Overall Survival, Cancer Specific Survival and 90-day mortality curves for the whole sample (left column) and comparison of the curves between sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients (right column).

Regarding the radio-induced toxicities, among the 28 irradiated patients 14, 6, 6 and 2 experienced a G0/G1, G2, G3 and G4 toxicity, respectively, according to the RTOG scale (Table II). No significant differences were registered neither for frequency nor for severity between the sarcopenic and the non-sarcopenic patients, and only one of the two individuals that developed the G4 toxicity, causing RT interruption at the 14th out of the 28th and the 18th out of the 30th planned sessions, was defined as sarcopenic.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Radiation-induced toxicity according to the RTOG scale.

According to the experienced toxicity, patients can be classified in two groups (Table III); the first one (20 patients, 6 of which sarcopenic) exhibited minor to moderate gravity (G0/G1/G2) of the adverse events, and the second one (8 patients, 2 of which sarcopenic) showed a more severe treatment-related symptomatology (G3/G4). Examining the non-sarcopenic cohort, no increase in the frequency of G3-G4 toxicity versus G1-G2 toxicity was observed (6 vs. 14, respectively, with 30% of G3-G4 among the non-sarcopenic patients); comparable results were obtained conducting the same analysis in the sarcopenic group (2 vs. 6, respectively, with 25% of G3-G4 among the sarcopenic patients), confirming the lack of correlation of sarcopenia with a greater tendency to give RT-related side effects.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Different toxicity grades in sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients.

Patients’ age did not significantly affect OS of our sample, as emerged by the lack of statistical correlation between them. The median CCI score of the whole sample was 8 (range=5-16), and comparing the OS of patients with a score higher and lower than this median value no significant differences were obtained regarding the 3-month OS (83.3% vs. 92.9%, respectively) and the 12-month OS (58.3% vs. 55%, respectively). Within the sarcopenic group, the number of patients with a CCI score >8 was not greater than the number of patients with a <8 score (3 vs. 5), being equally distributed. However, the number of patients with a score higher than 8 among the non-sarcopenic group were the same as those with a score lower than 8 (10 vs. 10). No significant correlation was observed neither between CCI and OS nor between CCI and sarcopenia.

Finally, higher grade toxicities (G3-G4) were significantly more frequent among patients with a greater CCI score (p-value=0.03).

Discussion

Sarcopenia is defined as a muscular mass loss resulting from catabolic processes activated by old age and stress factors. Surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy tremendously strain the body of cancer patients, causing a greater expenditure of energy and consequently an increase in all cellular catabolic processes that, as a result, subvert tissue composition (7).

Sarcopenia is typically associated with muscular weakness, accidental falls, fractures, restriction of the daily activity and increased risk of death (23) and it provides an accurate estimate of patients’ frailty thus being recently recognized as an independent predictive factor for a poor surgical outcome in elderly patients (24). The evidences that a poor muscular reserve leads to more perioperative complications, longer hospitalization and negative impact on both OS and CSS have been widely demonstrated in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder submitted to radical cystectomy (8, 17, 19), and similar results have been reported analyzing the outcomes of many other types of cancer such as breast, lung, gastric, colorectal, pancreatic, hepatobiliary carcinomas and melanoma (12-15).

In addition to an advanced stage of disease and a poor performance status, sarcopenia seems to affect not only surgery outcomes, but also chemotherapy and RT ones. In support, sarcopenic patients presenting a limited or extended small-cell lung cancer submitted to chemotherapy and/or RT showed a reduced OS (16), and those with metastatic urothelial carcinoma receiving chemotherapy developed more severe treatment-related toxicities (25). Furthermore, although not significantly affecting the OS sarcopenia was also associated to a higher frequency of acute toxicities after a stereotactic body radiation therapy for borderline resectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (26).

Considering these results, in the present study we focused on the impact of sarcopenia on the RT outcomes of MIBC elderly patients. Despite the limited size of our sample, sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients responded to RT in a similar way, and no significant correlations emerged between SMI and OS, CSS, 90-day mortality and RT-toxicity. In addition, patients’ comorbidities expressed according to the CCI score did not influence the OS outcomes though presenting a significant correlation with the experienced toxicity level, in agreement with the results of Santacaterina et al. and in contradiction with the studies by Mayr et al. and Boorjian et al. (4, 19, 27). Conversely, as only a small number of patients underwent chemotherapy with different regimens in terms of way of administration, time of delivery and pharmacological agents chosen, it is not possible to state how and how much its addition to RT influenced our outcomes.

We recognize that the validity of these promising results could be seriously compromised by the small size and heterogeneity of the analyzed sample; moreover, the poor life expectancy of elderly patients could hide the actual influence of both nutritional status and comorbidities on the outcomes under investigation. Another limitation is that even if the muscular status assessment of the enrolled patients was made through the accurate, reproducible and widely validated SMI method, the retrospective nature of the present study did not allow for a comparison between the SMI and other indicators of patients’ frailty such as the walk test or the grip strenght test.

Nevertheless, we stress the opportunity of an active intervention on sarcopenia; indeed, the gradual understanding of the molecular and cellular basis of this potentially reversible condition is leading to the development of new therapies aimed to the restoration of muscle reserve (28).

Since the OS and CSS did not deviate from the ones reported in surgical series, RT can be safely considered a feasible treatment for sarcopenic patients unfit for surgery. Finally, it is worth to point out that the present study has an important pivotal role as it is currently the third reported study aimed to a systematic assessment of sarcopenic effects on RT’s outcomes in MIBC elderly patients. Indeed, in line with our results, Stangl-Kremser et al. have highlighted how sarcopenia is not prognostic of survival in patients unfit for radical cystectomy or systemic chemotherapy (29). Furthermore in the comparison between sarcopenic (n=67) and non-sarcopenic (n=79) patients by Fraisse et al. sarcopenia was associated with neither survival nor severity of radiation-related adverse events (30).

As stated above, the results obtained in our retrospective series can not be considered conclusive due to the small and hetereogeneous sample and the related limited power of statistical analysis. However, it indicates the efficacy and excellent tolerance of radiotherapy in the entire cohort of patients who are not candidates or who refuse surgery, regardless of their sarcopenic condition. For this reason, studies similar to this but with a necessarily greater number of patients will be carried out.

Conclusion

Sarcopenia does not seem to be a negative prognostic factor for elderly patients affected by MIBC submitted to RT. Thus, RT is a feasible and effective treatment of sarcopenic patients thanks to its low toxicity profile which makes this the best alternative to surgery. Prospective randomized studies are necessary to strenghten results’ reliability and confirm this preliminary hypothesis.

Footnotes

  • Authors’ Contributions

    GF: Conception and organization of the work; Data analysis and interpretation; Writing of the first draft; Revision of the final version of the manuscript. AC: Conception and organization of the work; Data analysis and interpretation; Writing of the first draft. SP, SL: Writing of the first draft; Literature research; Critically revised the manuscript. LM, CT, VD, IN: Data acquisition; Literature research. AP, NS, GI, AntP: Data analysis and interpretation; Literature research. SteP, AS: Conception and organization of the work; Critically revised the manuscript; Guarantor and supervisor of the study.

  • This article is freely accessible online.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors report no conflicts of interest in relation to this study.

  • Received October 18, 2020.
  • Revision received November 7, 2020.
  • Accepted November 8, 2020.
  • Copyright© 2021, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica AIOM
    : Linee guida tumori dell’urotelio, 2019. Available at: https://www.aiom.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019_LG_AIOM_Urotelio.pdf [Last accessed on November 8, 2020]
  2. ↵
    1. Ploussard G,
    2. Shariat SF,
    3. Dragomir A,
    4. Kluth LA,
    5. Xylinas E,
    6. Masson-Lecomte A,
    7. Rieken M,
    8. Rink M,
    9. Matsumoto K,
    10. Kikuchi E,
    11. Klatte T,
    12. Boorjian SA,
    13. Lotan Y,
    14. Roghmann F,
    15. Fairey AS,
    16. Fradet Y,
    17. Black PC,
    18. Rendon R,
    19. Izawa J and
    20. Kassouf W
    : Conditional survival after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: evidence for a patient changing risk profile over time. Eur Urol 66: 361-370, 2014. PMID: 24139235. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.050
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. ↵
    1. Shariat SF,
    2. Karakiewicz PI,
    3. Palapattu GS,
    4. Amiel GE,
    5. Lotan Y,
    6. Rogers CG,
    7. Vazina A,
    8. Bastian PJ,
    9. Gupta A,
    10. Sagalowsky AI,
    11. Schoenberg M and
    12. Lerner SP
    : Nomograms provide improved accuracy for predicting survival after radical cystectomy. Clin Cancer Res 12: 6663-6676, 2006. PMID: 17121885. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0372
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Boorjian SA,
    2. Kim SP,
    3. Tollefson MK,
    4. Carrasco A,
    5. Cheville JC,
    6. Thompson RH,
    7. Thapa P and
    8. Frank I
    : Comparative performance of comorbidity indices for estimating perioperative and 5-year all cause mortality following radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol 190: 55-60, 2013. PMID: 23313198. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.01.010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Gregg JR,
    2. Cookson MS,
    3. Phillips S,
    4. Salem S,
    5. Chang SS,
    6. Clark PE,
    7. Davis R,
    8. Stimson CJ,
    9. Aghazadeh M,
    10. Smith JA and
    11. Barocas DA
    : Effect of preoperative nutritional deficiency on mortality after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol 185: 90-96, 2011. PMID: 21074802. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.021
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Roghmann F,
    2. Trinh Q-D,
    3. Braun K,
    4. von Bodman C,
    5. Brock M,
    6. Noldus J and
    7. Palisaar J
    : Standardized assessment of complications in a contemporary series of European patients undergoing radical cystectomy: Assessment of complications after cystectomy. Int J Urol 21: 143-149, 2014. PMID: 23906282. DOI: 10.1111/iju.12232
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. ↵
    1. Zargar H,
    2. Almassi N,
    3. Kovac E,
    4. Ercole C,
    5. Remer E,
    6. Rini B,
    7. Stephenson A,
    8. Garcia JA and
    9. Grivas P
    : Change in psoas muscle volume as a predictor of outcomes in patients treated with chemotherapy and radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Bladder Cancer 3: 57-63, 2017. PMID: 28149936. DOI: 10.3233/BLC-160080
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. ↵
    1. Saitoh-Maeda Y,
    2. Kawahara T,
    3. Miyoshi Y,
    4. Tsutsumi S,
    5. Takamoto D,
    6. Shimokihara K,
    7. Hayashi Y,
    8. Mochizuki T,
    9. Ohtaka M,
    10. Nakamura M,
    11. Hattori Y,
    12. Teranishi J,
    13. Yumura Y,
    14. Osaka K,
    15. Ito H,
    16. Makiyama K,
    17. Nakaigawa N,
    18. Yao M and
    19. Uemura H
    : A low psoas muscle volume correlates with a longer hospitalization after radical cystectomy. BMC Urol 17: 87, 2017. PMID: 28923108. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-017-0279-2
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  9. ↵
    1. Martin L,
    2. Birdsell L,
    3. MacDonald N,
    4. Reiman T,
    5. Clandinin MT,
    6. McCargar LJ,
    7. Murphy R,
    8. Ghosh S,
    9. Sawyer MB and
    10. Baracos VE
    : Cancer cachexia in the age of obesity: skeletal muscle depletion is a powerful prognostic factor, independent of body mass index. J Clin Oncol 31: 1539-1547, 2013. PMID: 23530101. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2012.45.2722
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Cruz-Jentoft AJ,
    2. Baeyens JP,
    3. Bauer JM,
    4. Boirie Y,
    5. Cederholm T,
    6. Landi F,
    7. Martin FC,
    8. Michel J-P,
    9. Rolland Y,
    10. Schneider SM,
    11. Topinkova E,
    12. Vandewoude M and
    13. Zamboni M
    : Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: Report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. Age Ageing 39: 412-423, 2010. PMID: 20392703. DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afq034
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Fearon K,
    2. Strasser F,
    3. Anker SD,
    4. Bosaeus I,
    5. Bruera E,
    6. Fainsinger RL,
    7. Jatoi A,
    8. Loprinzi C,
    9. MacDonald N,
    10. Mantovani G,
    11. Davis M,
    12. Muscaritoli M,
    13. Ottery F,
    14. Radbruch L,
    15. Ravasco P,
    16. Walsh D,
    17. Wilcock A,
    18. Kaasa S and
    19. Baracos VE
    : Definition and classification of cancer cachexia: an international consensus. Lancet Oncol 12: 489-495, 2011. PMID: 21296615. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70218-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Mir O,
    2. Coriat R,
    3. Blanchet B,
    4. Durand J-P,
    5. Boudou-Rouquette P,
    6. Michels J,
    7. Ropert S,
    8. Vidal M,
    9. Pol S,
    10. Chaussade S and
    11. Goldwasser F
    : Sarcopenia predicts early dose-limiting toxicities and pharmacokinetics of sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. PLoS One 7: e37563, 2012. PMID: 22666367. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037563
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Del Fabbro E,
    2. Parsons H,
    3. Warneke CL,
    4. Pulivarthi K,
    5. Litton JK,
    6. Dev R,
    7. Palla SL,
    8. Brewster A and
    9. Bruera E
    : The relationship between body composition and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with operable breast cancer. Oncologist 17: 1240-1245, 2012. PMID: 22903527. DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0169
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Sabel MS,
    2. Lee J,
    3. Cai S,
    4. Englesbe MJ,
    5. Holcombe S and
    6. Wang S
    : Sarcopenia as a prognostic factor among patients with stage III melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 18: 3579-3585, 2011. PMID: 21822551. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-1976-9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Antoun S,
    2. Borget I and
    3. Lanoy E
    : Impact of sarcopenia on the prognosis and treatment toxicities in patients diagnosed with cancer: Curr Opin Support Palliat Care 7: 383-389, 2013. DOI: 10.1097/SPC.0000000000000011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Kim EY,
    2. Kim YS,
    3. Park I,
    4. Ahn HK,
    5. Cho EK and
    6. Jeong YM
    : Prognostic significance of ct-determined sarcopenia in patients with small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 10: 1795-1799, 2015. PMID: 24189893. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000690
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Psutka SP,
    2. Carrasco A,
    3. Schmit GD,
    4. Moynagh MR,
    5. Boorjian SA,
    6. Frank I,
    7. Stewart SB,
    8. Thapa P,
    9. Tarrell RF,
    10. Cheville JC and
    11. Tollefson MK
    : Sarcopenia in patients with bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy: Impact on cancer-specific and all-cause mortality: Sarcopenia and Survival After RC for UC. Cancer 120: 2910-2918, 2014. PMID: 24840856. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.28798
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Smith AB,
    2. Deal AM,
    3. Yu H,
    4. Boyd B,
    5. Matthews J,
    6. Wallen EM,
    7. Pruthi RS,
    8. Woods ME,
    9. Muss H and
    10. Nielsen ME
    : Sarcopenia as a predictor of complications and survival following radical cystectomy. J Urol 191: 1714-1720, 2014. PMID: 24423437. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.047
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. ↵
    1. Mayr R,
    2. Gierth M,
    3. Zeman F,
    4. Reiffen M,
    5. Seeger P,
    6. Wezel F,
    7. Pycha A,
    8. Comploj E,
    9. Bonatti M,
    10. Ritter M,
    11. van Rhijn BWG,
    12. Burger M,
    13. Bolenz C,
    14. Fritsche H-M and
    15. Martini T
    : Sarcopenia as a comorbidity-independent predictor of survival following radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: Sarcopenia and radical cystectomy. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 9: 505-513, 2018. PMID: 29479839. DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.12279
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  17. ↵
    1. Cacciola A,
    2. Parisi S,
    3. Tamburella C,
    4. Lillo S,
    5. Ferini G,
    6. Molino L,
    7. Iatì G,
    8. Pontoriero A,
    9. Bottari A,
    10. Mazziotti S,
    11. Cicero G,
    12. Minutoli F,
    13. Blandino A and
    14. Pergolizzi S
    : Stereotactic body radiation therapy and radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of liver metastases: How and when? Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 25: 299-306, 2020. PMID: 32194349. DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2020.02.010
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Iatì G,
    2. Parisi S,
    3. Santacaterina A,
    4. Pontoriero A,
    5. Cacciola A,
    6. Brogna A,
    7. Platania A,
    8. Palazzolo C,
    9. Cambareri D,
    10. Davì V,
    11. Napoli I,
    12. Lillo S,
    13. Severo C,
    14. Tamburella C,
    15. Vadalà R,
    16. Delia P and
    17. Pergolizzi S
    : Simultaneous integrated boost radiotherapy in unresectable stage IV (M0) head and neck squamous cell cancer patients: Daily clinical practice. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 25: 399-404, 2020. PMID: 32368191. DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2020.04.006
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  18. ↵
    1. Pontoriero A,
    2. Iatì G,
    3. Cacciola A,
    4. Conti A,
    5. Brogna A,
    6. Siragusa C,
    7. Ferini G,
    8. Davì V,
    9. Tamburella C,
    10. Molino L,
    11. Cambareri D,
    12. Severo C,
    13. Parisi S,
    14. Settineri N,
    15. Ielo I and
    16. Pergolizzi S
    : Stereotactic body radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost in patients with spinal metastases. Technol Cancer Res Treat 19: 153303382090444, 2020. PMID: 32336255. DOI: 10.1177/1533033820904447
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  19. ↵
    1. Shaw SC,
    2. Dennison EM and
    3. Cooper C
    : Epidemiology of Sarcopenia: Determinants Throughout the Lifecourse. Calcif Tissue Int 101: 229-247, 2017. PMID: 28421264. DOI: 10.1007/s00223-017-0277-0
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. ↵
    1. Makary MA,
    2. Segev DL,
    3. Pronovost PJ,
    4. Syin D,
    5. Bandeen-Roche K,
    6. Patel P,
    7. Takenaga R,
    8. Devgan L,
    9. Holzmueller CG,
    10. Tian J and
    11. Fried LP
    : Frailty as a predictor of surgical outcomes in older patients. J Am Coll Surg 210: 901-908, 2010. PMID: 20510798. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.01.028
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Taguchi S,
    2. Akamatsu N,
    3. Nakagawa T,
    4. Gonoi W,
    5. Kanatani A,
    6. Miyazaki H,
    7. Fujimura T,
    8. Fukuhara H,
    9. Kume H and
    10. Homma Y
    : Sarcopenia evaluated using the skeletal muscle index is a significant prognostic factor for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer 14: 237-243, 2016. PMID: 26337653. DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2015.07.015
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Jin WH,
    2. Mellon EA,
    3. Frakes JM,
    4. Murimwa GZ,
    5. Hodul PJ,
    6. Pimiento JM,
    7. Malafa MP and
    8. Hoffe SE
    : Impact of sarcopenia in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients receiving stereotactic body radiation therapy. J Gastrointest Oncol 9: 24-34, 2018. PMID: 29564168. DOI: 10.21037/jgo.2017.09.13
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  23. ↵
    1. Santacaterina A,
    2. Platania A,
    3. Palazzolo C,
    4. Spatola C,
    5. Acquaviva G,
    6. Crispi M,
    7. Privitera G,
    8. Settineri N and
    9. Pergolizzi S
    : Very elderly (>80 years), frail patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and comorbidities: is curative irradiation feasible? Tumori J 101: 609-613, 2015. PMID: 25983093. DOI: 10.5301/tj.5000361
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. ↵
    1. Sayer AA,
    2. Robinson SM,
    3. Patel HP,
    4. Shavlakadze T,
    5. Cooper C and
    6. Grounds MD
    : New horizons in the pathogenesis, diagnosis and management of sarcopenia. Age Ageing 42: 145-150, 2013. PMID: 23315797. DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afs191
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Stangl-Kremser J,
    2. D’Andrea D,
    3. Vartolomei M,
    4. Abufaraj M,
    5. Goldner G,
    6. Baltzer P,
    7. Shariat SF and
    8. Tamandl D
    : Prognostic value of nutritional indices and body composition parameters including sarcopenia in patients treated with radiotherapy for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Urol Oncol Semin Orig Investig 37: 372-379, 2019. PMID: 30578161. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.11.001
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. ↵
    1. Fraisse G,
    2. Renard Y,
    3. Lebacle C,
    4. Masson-Lecomte A,
    5. Desgrandchamps F,
    6. Hennequin C,
    7. Bessede T and
    8. Irani J
    : La sarcopénie est-elle un facteur de morbi-mortalité dans le traitement des tumeurs localisées de la vessie infiltrant le muscle ? Prog En Urol 30: 41-50, 2020. PMID: 31818689. DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2019.11.002
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

In Vivo: 35 (1)
In Vivo
Vol. 35, Issue 1
January-February 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on In Vivo.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Curative Radiotherapy in Elderly Patients With Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: The Prognostic Role of Sarcopenia
(Your Name) has sent you a message from In Vivo
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the In Vivo web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
16 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Curative Radiotherapy in Elderly Patients With Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: The Prognostic Role of Sarcopenia
GIANLUCA FERINI, ALBERTO CACCIOLA, SILVANA PARISI, SARA LILLO, LAURA MOLINO, CONSUELO TAMBURELLA, VALERIO DAVI, ILENIA NAPOLI, ANGELO PLATANIA, NICOLA SETTINERI, GIUSEPPE IATI, ANTONIO PONTORIERO, STEFANO PERGOLIZZI, ANNA SANTACATERINA
In Vivo Jan 2021, 35 (1) 571-578; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12293

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Curative Radiotherapy in Elderly Patients With Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: The Prognostic Role of Sarcopenia
GIANLUCA FERINI, ALBERTO CACCIOLA, SILVANA PARISI, SARA LILLO, LAURA MOLINO, CONSUELO TAMBURELLA, VALERIO DAVI, ILENIA NAPOLI, ANGELO PLATANIA, NICOLA SETTINERI, GIUSEPPE IATI, ANTONIO PONTORIERO, STEFANO PERGOLIZZI, ANNA SANTACATERINA
In Vivo Jan 2021, 35 (1) 571-578; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12293
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • How Much Daily Image-guided Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Is Useful for Proctitis Prevention With Respect to Static Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Supported by Topical Medications Among Localized Prostate Cancer Patients?
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Evaluation of TET Family Gene Expression and 5-Hydroxymethylcytosine as Potential Epigenetic Markers in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer
  • Automated Non-coplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Planning for Maxillary Sinus Carcinoma
  • The Influence of the Rapid Increase in the Number of Adverse Event Reports for COVID-19 Vaccine on the Disproportionality Analysis Using JADER
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Radiotherapy
  • Sarcopenia
  • bladder cancer
  • elderly
In Vivo

© 2023 In Vivo

Powered by HighWire