The impact of sarcopenia on clinical outcomes in men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Sarcopenia is common in men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and has been largely assessed opportunistically through computed-tomography (CT) scans, excluding measures of muscle function. Therefore, the impact of a comprehensive assessment of sarcopenia on clinical outcomes in men with mCRPC is poorly understood. The objectives of this study were to comprehensively assess sarcopenia through CT scans and measures of muscle function and examine its impact on severe treatment toxicity, time to first emergency room (ER) visit, disease progression, and overall mortality in men initiating chemotherapy or androgen receptor-targeted axis (ARAT) therapy for mCRPC. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study of men with mCRPC at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between July 2015-May 2021. Participants were classified as sarcopenic if they had CT-based low muscle mass or low muscle density, a grip strength and gait speed score of <35.5kg and <0.8m/s, respectively, prior to treatment initiation. The impact of sarcopenia on severe treatment toxicity was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to determine the impact of sarcopenia on risk of visiting the ER, prostate-specific antigen progression, radiographic progression, and overall mortality. RESULTS: A total of 110 men (mean age: 74.6) were included in the analysis. At baseline, 30 (27.3%) were classified as sarcopenic. Sarcopenia was a significant predictor of severe toxicity (aOR = 6.26, 95%CI = 1.17-33.58, P = 0.032) and ER visits (aHR = 4.41, 95%CI = 1.26-15.43, p = 0.020) in men initiating ARAT but not in men initiating chemotherapy. Sarcopenia was also a predictor of radiographic progression (aHR = 2.39, 95%CI = 1.06-5.36, p = 0.035) and overall mortality (aHR = 2.44, 95%CI = 1.17-5.08, p = 0.018) regardless of treatment type. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline sarcopenia predicts radiographic progression and overall mortality in men with mCRPC regardless of the type of treatment and may also predict severe treatment toxicity and ER visits in men initiating ARAT.

Comparative Analysis of Endovascular Intervention and Endarterectomy in Patients with Femoral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Peripheral artery disease is a prevalent illness affecting more than 200 million people worldwide. A commonly used technique to manage the condition has been open endarterectomy. However, in recent times, a shift towards minimally invasive techniques has resulted in endovascular intervention as a popular alternative. This review aims to assess the safety and efficacy of endovascular intervention when compared with endarterectomy. A systematic review of the articles published in PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and Scopus within the last 10 years was conducted. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to, and the Newcastle-Ottawa and NICE quality assessment scales were used. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using the RStudio software (RStudio Team (2021). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R, PBC, Boston, MA, USA). Twenty-six studies were included, with a total of 7126 patients (endovascular, 2496; endarterectomy, 4630). Technical success was greater for endarterectomy than endovascular intervention with an odds ratio of 0.38; 95% CI [0.27-0.54]. In terms of safety as well endovascular intervention was better than endarterectomy with an odds ratio of 0.22; 95% CI [0.15 to 0.31] for wound infection. Endovascular intervention is a safe and effective procedure; however, it cannot be considered superior to endarterectomy.