Analysis on correlation between body components at T4 thoracic vertebra plane on chest CT in patients with multiple myeloma and prognosis

Xue BAI,Chenchen WANG,Zhangzhen SHI,Lintao BI

PDF(555 KB)
PDF(555 KB)
J Jilin Univ Med Ed ›› 2024, Vol. 50 ›› Issue (4) : 1098-1108. DOI: 10.13481/j.1671-587X.20240424
Research in clinical medicine

Analysis on correlation between body components at T4 thoracic vertebra plane on chest CT in patients with multiple myeloma and prognosis

  • Xue BAI,Chenchen WANG,Zhangzhen SHI,Lintao BI()
Author information +
History +

Abstract

Objective To automatically segment four body components at the T4 thoracic veertebra plane on chest CT in the newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients by deep learning model, and to discuss the correlation between the four body components and the prognosis of the MM patients. Methods The retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of the MM patients diagnosed in our hospital from January 2017 to December 2021. The clinical informations such as age, gender, weight, height, and body mass index (BMI) of the patients were collected. The laboratory data of the patients were collected, including serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), calcium (Ca), creatinine (Scr), albumin (Alb), hemoglobin (Hb), β2-microglobulin (β2-MG), and serum free light chains. The chest CT images of 79 regularly evaluated MM patients detected by deep learning model were divide into four body components: pectoralis major, pectoralis minor, subcutaneous fat, and mediastinal fat. Image J software was used to detect the areas of the four body components at the T4 thoracic vertebra plane, and their correlation with the prognosis of the MM patients was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Results The univariate analysis results showed that the area of subcutaneous fat, serum Ca levels, Scr levels, and International Staging System (ISS) stage were related to the overall survival (OS) of the MM patients (HR=2.260, 95% CI: 1.116-4.578, P=0.024; HR=2.088, 95% CI: 1.007-4.327, P=0.048; HR=2.209, 95% CI: 1.105-4.414, P=0.025; HR=1.730, 95% CI: 1.040-2.879, P=0.035). The multivariate analysis results showed that the area of subcutaneous fat among the four body components was an independent risk factor affecting the prognosis of the MM patients (95% CI: 1.228-5.782, P=0.013). The Log-Rank test results showed that compared with high subcutaneous fat area group, the OS of the patients in low subcutaneous fat area group was decreased(P=0.018). There was no significant difference in OS of the patients with different genders between high subcutaneous fat area group and low subcutaneous fat area group (P>0.05). In the patients without hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, compared with high subcutaneous fat area group, the OS of the patients in low subcutaneous fat area group was decreased (P=0.037). Conclusion Among the four body components at the T4 thoracic vertebra plane, the area of subcutaneous fat is related to the OS of the MM patients and it is an independent risk factor for the prognosis of the MM patients, while the areas of mediastinal fat, pectoralis major, and pectoralis minor have no predictive value for the prognosis of the MM patients.

Key words

Multiple myeloma / Computed tomography / Body composition / Deep learning model

CLC number

R733.3

Cite this article

Download Citations
Xue BAI,Chenchen WANG,Zhangzhen SHI,Lintao BI. Analysis on correlation between body components at T4 thoracic vertebra plane on chest CT in patients with multiple myeloma and prognosis. Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition). 2024, 50(4): 1098-1108 https://doi.org/10.13481/j.1671-587X.20240424

References

1 COWAN A J, GREEN D J, KWOK M, et al. Diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma: a review[J]. JAMA, 2022, 327(5): 464-477.
2 KIM J M, CHUNG E, CHO E S, et al. Impact of subcutaneous and visceral fat adiposity in patients with colorectal cancer[J]. Clin Nutr, 2021, 40(11): 5631-5638.
3 PAI P C, CHUANG C C, CHUANG W C, et al. Pretreatment subcutaneous adipose tissue predicts the outcomes of patients with head and neck cancer receiving definitive radiation and chemoradiation in Taiwan [J]. Cancer Med, 2018, 7(5): 1630-1641.
4 TAKEOKA Y, SAKATOKU K, MIURA A, et al. Prognostic effect of low subcutaneous adipose tissue on survival outcome in patients with multiple myeloma[J]. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk, 2016, 16(8): 434-441.
5 RAJKUMAR S V, DIMOPOULOS M A, PALUMBO A, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2014, 15(12): e538-e548.
6 RAJKUMAR S V. Multiple myeloma: 2016 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and management[J]. Am J Hematol, 2016, 91(7): 719-734.
7 KUMAR S K, DISPENZIERI A, LACY M Q, et al. Continued improvement in survival in multiple myeloma: changes in early mortality and outcomes in older patients[J]. Leukemia, 2014, 28(5): 1122-1128.
8 WANG J Z, SHI X J, YAO X C, et al. Deep learning-based CT imaging in diagnosing myeloma and its prognosis evaluation[J]. J Healthc Eng, 2021, 2021: 5436793.
9 HOPKINS J J, SAWYER M B. A review of body composition and pharmacokinetics in oncology[J]. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol, 2017, 10(9): 947-956.
10 ALEIXO G F P, SHACHAR S S, NYROP K A, et al. Myosteatosis and prognosis in cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2020, 145: 102839
11 PETRELLI F, CORTELLINI A, INDINI A, et al. Association of obesity with survival outcomes in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. JAMA Netw Open, 2021, 4(3): e213520.
12 PICKHARDT P J, GRAFFY P M, PEREZ A A, et al. Opportunistic screening at abdominal CT: use of automated body composition biomarkers for added cardiometabolic value[J]. Radiographics, 2021, 41(2): 524-542.
13 PRADO C M, LIEFFERS J R, MCCARGAR L J, et al. Prevalence and clinical implications of sarcopenic obesity in patients with solid tumours of the respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts: a population-based study[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2008, 9(7): 629-635.
14 PRADO C M M, BIRDSELL L A, BARACOS V E. The emerging role of computerized tomography in assessing cancer cachexia[J]. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care, 2009, 3(4): 269-275.
15 BATES D D B, PICKHARDT P J. CT-derived body composition assessment as a prognostic tool in oncologic patients: from opportunistic research to artificial intelligence-based clinical implementation[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2022, 219(4): 671-680.
16 MATHUR S, ROZENBERG D, VERWEEL L, et al. Chest computed tomography is a valid measure of body composition in individuals with advanced lung disease[J]. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging, 2020, 40(5): 360-368.
17 GRAFFY P M, SUMMERS R M, PEREZ A A, et al. Automated assessment of longitudinal biomarker changes at abdominal CT: correlation with subsequent cardiovascular events in an asymptomatic adult screening cohort[J]. Abdom Radiol, 2021, 46(6): 2976-2984.
18 PICKHARDT P J, GRAFFY P M, ZEA R, et al. Automated abdominal CT imaging biomarkers for opportunistic prediction of future major osteoporotic fractures in asymptomatic adults[J]. Radiology, 2020, 297(1): 64-72.
19 PICKHARDT P J, GRAFFY P M, ZEA R, et al. Utilizing fully automated abdominal CT-based biomarkers for opportunistic screening for metabolic syndrome in adults without symptoms[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2021, 216(1): 85-92.
20 WESTON A D, KORFIATIS P, KLINE T L, et al. Automated abdominal segmentation of CT scans for body composition analysis using deep learning[J]. Radiology, 2019, 290(3): 669-679.
21 SHEN W, PUNYANITYA M, WANG Z M, et al. Total body skeletal muscle and adipose tissue volumes: estimation from a single abdominal cross-sectional image[J]. J Appl Physiol, 2004, 97(6): 2333-2338.

Comments

PDF(555 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/