Blood biomarkers for sarcopenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.

Biomarkers are emerging as a potential tool for screening or diagnosing sarcopenia. We aimed to summarize the current evidence on the diagnostic test accuracy of biomarkers for sarcopenia. We comprehensively searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to January 2023 and only included diagnostic test accuracy studies. We identified 32 studies with 23,840 participants (women, 58.26%) that assessed a total of 30 biomarkers. The serum creatinine to cystatin C ratio (Cr/CysC) demonstrated a pooled sensitivity ranging from 51% (95% confidence interval [CI] 44-59%) to 86% (95% CI 70-95%) and a pooled specificity ranged from 55% (95% CI 38-70%) to 76% (95% CI 63-86%) for diagnosing sarcopenia defined by five different diagnostic criteria (11 studies, 7240 participants). The aspartate aminotransferase to alanine aminotransferase ratio demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 62% (95% CI 56-67%) and a pooled specificity of 66% (95% CI 60-72%) (3 studies, 11,146 participants). The other 28 blood biomarkers exhibited low-to-moderate diagnostic accuracy for sarcopenia regardless of the reference standards. In conclusion, none of these biomarkers are optimal for screening or diagnosing sarcopenia. Well-designed studies are needed to explore and validate novel biomarkers for sarcopenia.

Validated Tools for Screening Sarcopenia: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: Choosing the optimal sarcopenia screening tool for a specific clinical scenario is challenging. We aimed to summarize all validated sarcopenia screening tools with diagnostic accuracy tested in one or more study populations. DESIGN: Scoping review. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Hospitals, nursing homes, communities, or health checkups. METHODS: We systematically searched 3 databases in April 2022: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. Two review authors independently performed the study selection and data extraction. The included tools' contents, characteristics, and number of citations were summarized and visualized. RESULTS: We summarized 102 diagnostic accuracy studies involving 53 screening tools, classified into 7 groups: questionnaires (n = 13); serum biomarkers (n = 10); formulas, algorithms, and models (n = 9); physical ability tests (n = 9); integration tools (n = 7); anthropometric indices (n = 3); and ultrasound or bioimpedance analysis (n = 2). The most commonly used questionnaire was SARC-F (770 citations), followed by SARC-CalF (254 citations) and MSRA-7 (61 citations). Handgrip strength and Ishii score were the most widely used physical performance tests (331 citations) and formulas (294 citations), respectively. Sarcopenia index (based on serum cystatin C and creatinine) and calf circumference were the most commonly used serum biomarkers (123 citations) and anthropometric indexes (127 citations), respectively. Ultrasound was the most commonly used imaging tool for screening sarcopenia (57 citations). The included tools varied significantly in content. Various tools assessed some or all components of sarcopenia with different methods, and others assessed different domains, such as age, body mass index, falls, diet, and even mental health. We also summarized the screening tools that were validated in different clinical settings (hospitals, communities, nursing homes, and health checkups). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: More than 50 validated tools are currently available for screening sarcopenia in different clinical settings. The results of this review may help clinicians and researchers in selecting optimal tools for sarcopenia in different clinical scenarios and in developing future tools.

The value of different imaging methods in the diagnosis of breast cancer: A protocol for network meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.

BACKGROUND: : Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women all over the world and the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality. Imaging examination plays an important role in the diagnosis of early breast cancer. Due to different imaging principles and methods, all kinds of examinations have their advantages and disadvantages. It is particularly important for clinicians to choose these examination methods reasonably to achieve the best diagnostic effect. The objectives of this systematic review and NMA are to determine the diagnostic accuracy of imaging technologies for breast cancer and to compare the diagnostic accuracy of different index tests and to support guidelines development and clinical practice. METHODS: : PubMed, Embase.com, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and SinoMed will be searched to identify relevant studies up to August 31, 2021. We will include random controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies that evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of different imaging diagnostic methods for breast cancer. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 quality assessment tool will be used to assess the risk of bias in each study. Standard pairwise meta-analysis and NMA will be performed using STATA V.12.0, MetaDiSc 1.40, and R 3.4.1 software to compare the diagnostic efficacy of different imaging diagnostic methods. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to investigate the sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: : The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: : This study will comprehensively evaluate the accuracy of different imaging diagnostic methods in the diagnosis of breast cancer. The results of this study will provide high-quality evidence to support clinical practice and guidelines development.

Effect of Taijiquan assisted rehabilitation for breast cancer patients: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Taijiquan, as a supplementary and alternative method, has attracted more and more attention in the treatment of breast cancer. But up to now, no systematic review has been performed to evaluate the efficacy of Taijiquan in the treatment of breast cancer. In this study, Cochrane systematic review method will be used to evaluate the effect of Taijiquan in the rehabilitation process of breast cancer patients after treatment. METHODS: PubMed, Embase. com, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and SinoMed will be searched to identify relevant studies up to May 31, 2021. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the application of Taijiquan in post-treatment breast cancer patients. We will use the Cochrane bias risk assessment tool to assess the quality of included RCTs. We will use Stata 13.0 to perform pairwise meta-analyses using the inverse variance method. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to investigate the sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: This study will comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of Taijiquan in the rehabilitation treatment of breast cancer. The results of this study will provide high-quality evidence to support clinical practice and guidelines development.

Impact of cancer on mortality and severity of corona virus disease 2019: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are in a state of systemic immunosuppression and are considered a highly vulnerable population in the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. However, the relationship between cancer and the severity and mortality of patients with COVID-19 remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate whether cancer patients with COVID-19 may be at an increased risk of severe illness and mortality. METHODS: We will perform comprehensive searches in PubMed, EMBASE.com, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify studies providing prevalence of cancer between patients with severe and non-severe illness or between non-survivors and survivors. We will use the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale to assess the quality of included studies. We will conduct pairwise meta-analyses to compute the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval using the Mantel Haenszel method with the random-effects model. The statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using the I statistic. Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and meta-regression analyses will be performed to explore the sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis will systematically evaluate the association between cancer and the severity and mortality of patients with COVID-19. This study will provide evidence to help determine whether cancer patients should be provided with special precautions and advised to use stronger personal protection. INPLASY REGISTRATION NUMBER: INPLASY202090093.