Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Muscle mass estimation on breast magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer patients: comparison between psoas muscle area on computer tomography and pectoralis muscle area on MRI

  • Breast
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the correlation between psoas muscle area (TPA) on CT images and pectoralis muscle area (PMA) on MRI in breast cancer patients.

Methods

This retrospective study was institutional review board approved and women involved gave written informed consent. Twenty six patients with both body CT and breast MRI available were evaluated. Two radiologists calculated TPA on 1.25-mm and 5-mm body CT images. Two radiologists measured PMA on axial T1-weighted images. Statistical analysis included inter- and intra-reader agreement and correlation between TPA on CT and PMA on MRI.

Results

The Pearson r correlation coefficient was 0.70 (95% CI 0.41–0.81) and the coefficient of determination was 0.49. The inter-reader agreement was k = 0.85 and k = 0.79 for axial 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. The intra-reader agreement of reader 1 was k = 0.98 and k = 0.94 for 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. The intra-reader agreement of reader 2 was k = 0.95 and k = 0.94 for 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. On axial T1-weighted images, the inter-reader agreement for radiologists evaluating the PMA was k = 0.61. Intra-observer agreement of reader 1 and reader 2 for PMA estimation was good (0.62 and 0.64), respectively.

Conclusion

The correlation between TPA on CT images and PMA on MRI was very good. Pectoralis muscle area on breast MRI could be useful to estimate muscle mass in women with breast cancer.

Key Points

• Pectoralis muscle area can be estimated on breast MRI

• Total psoas area on CT and pectoralis muscle area on MRI are strongly correlated

• Pectoralis muscle area on breast MRI could estimate the skeletal muscle mass

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ACS:

American Cancer Society

CT:

Computer tomography

EUSOBI:

European Society of Breast Imaging

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

NCCN:

National Comprehensive Cancer Network

PMA:

Pectoralis muscle area

TPA:

Total psoas area

References

  1. Baumgartner RN, Koehler KM, Gallagher D et al (1998) Epidemiology of sarcopenia among the elderly in New Mexico. Am J Epidemiol 147:755–763

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Muscaritoli M, Anker SD, Argilés J et al (2010) Consensus definition of sarcopenia, cachexia and pre-cachexia: joint document elaborated by special interest groups (SIG) “cachexia-anorexia in chronic wasting diseases” and “nutrition in geriatrics”. Clin Nutr 29:154–159

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A (2015) Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 65:87–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Stewart B, Wild CP (2014) World cancer report 2014. World Health Organization, Geneva. http://publications.iarc.fr/Non-Series-Publications/World-Cancer-Reports/World-Cancer-Report-2014. Accessed 26 Oct 2017

  5. Del Fabbro E, Parsons H, Warneke CL et al (2012) The relationship between body composition and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with operable breast cancer. Oncologist 17:1240–1245

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Prado CM, Baracos VE, McCargar LJ et al (2009) Sarcopenia as a determinant of chemotherapy toxicity and time to tumor progression in metastatic breast cancer patients receiving capecitabine treatment. Clin Cancer Res 15:2920–2926

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Deluche E, Leobon S, Desport JC, Venat-Bouvet L, Usseglio J, Tubiana-Mathieu N (2018) Impact of body composition on outcome in patients with early breast cancer. Support Care Cancer 26:861–868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Klassen O, Schmidt ME, Ulrich CM et al (2017) Muscle strength in breast cancer patients receiving different treatment regimes. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 8:305–316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Villaseñor A, Ballard-Barbash R, Baumgartner K et al (2012) Prevalence and prognostic effect of sarcopenia in breast cancer survivors: the HEAL study. J Cancer Surviv 6:398–406

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Shen W, Punyanitya M, Wang Z et al (1985) Total body skeletal muscle and adipose tissue volumes: estimation from a single abdominal cross-sectional image. J Appl Physiol 1985:2333e8

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jones KI, Doleman B, Scott S, Lund JN, Williams JP (2015) Simple psoas cross-sectional area measurement is a quick and easy method to assess sarcopenia and predicts major surgical complications. Colorectal Dis 17:20–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S et al (2015) Primary breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 5:8–30

  13. Gilbert FJ, Selamoglu A (2018) Personalised screening: is this the way forward? Clin Radiol 73:327–333

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kinsey CM, San José Estépar R, van der Velden J, Cole BF, Christiani DC, Washko GR (2017) Lower pectoralis muscle area is associated with a worse overall survival in non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 26:38–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Go SI, Park MJ, Song HN et al (2017) A comparison of pectoralis versus lumbar skeletal muscle indices for defining sarcopenia in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma - two are better than one. Oncotarget 8:47007–47019

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Bland JM, Altman DG (2003) Applying the right statistics: analyses of measurement studies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 22:85–93

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bland JM, Altman DG (1996) Measurement error proportional to the mean. BMJ 313:106

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Bland JM, Altman DG (1996) Measurement error. BMJ 313:744

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Furtner J, Berghoff AS, Albtoush OM et al (2017) Survival prediction using temporal muscle thickness measurements on cranial magnetic resonance images in patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases. Eur Radiol 27:3167–3173

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Rier HN, Jager A, Sleijfer S, van Rosmalen J, Kock MCJM, Levin MD (2017) Low muscle attenuation is a prognostic factor for survival in metastatic breast cancer patients treated with first line palliative chemotherapy. Breast 31:9–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mann RM, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA et al (2015) Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women’s information. Eur Radiol 25:3669–3678

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Strigel RM, Rollenhagen J, Burnside ES et al (2017) Screening breast MRI outcomes in routine clinical practice: comparison to BI-RADS benchmarks. Acad Radiol 24:411–417

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W et al (2007) American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 57:75–89

  25. Warner E, Messersmith H, Causer P, Eisen A, Shumak R, Plewes D (2008) Systematic review: using magnetic resonance imaging to screen women at high risk for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med 148:671–679

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sardanelli F, Podo F, Santoro F et al (2011) High Breast Cancer Risk Italian 1 (HIBCRIT-1) Study (2011) Multicenter surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the high breast cancer risk Italian 1 study): final results. Invest Radiol 46:94–105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lehman CD, Lee JM, DeMartini WB et al (2016) Screening MRI in women with a personal history of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv349

  28. Boutin RD, Kaptuch JM, Bateni CP, Chalfant JS, Yao L (2016) Influence of IV contrast administration on CT measures of muscle and bone attenuation: implications for sarcopenia and osteoporosis evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 207:1046–1054

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Sciences, DISSAL- University of Genova, Via Pastore, 1, 16138, Genoa, Italy

    Federica Rossi, Francesca Valdora, Emanuele Barabino & Alberto Stefano Tagliafico

  2. Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy

    Massimo Calabrese & Alberto Stefano Tagliafico

Authors
  1. Federica Rossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesca Valdora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emanuele Barabino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Massimo Calabrese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alberto Stefano Tagliafico
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Federica Rossi.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Alberto Stefano Tagliafico.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional review board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• retrospective

• cross-sectional study

• performed at one institution

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rossi, F., Valdora, F., Barabino, E. et al. Muscle mass estimation on breast magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer patients: comparison between psoas muscle area on computer tomography and pectoralis muscle area on MRI. Eur Radiol 29, 494–500 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5663-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5663-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation