Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Computed tomography-based analyses of baseline body composition parameters and changes in breast cancer patients under treatment with CDK 4/6 inhibitors

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Body composition parameters including muscle and adipose tissue measurements have emerged as prognostic factors in cancer patients. Besides cell cycle regulation, CDK 4 and 6 also control metabolic processes (lipid synthesis, glycolysis, and mitochondrial function). We studied the impact of baseline body composition parameters on response to CDK 4/6 inhibition and changes on body composition during treatment.

Methods

Retrospective study of 50 patients treated at Institut Jules Bordet between December 2016 and August 2019 with endocrine therapy and CDK 4/6 inhibitor as first or second-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer (BC). CT-based body composition analysis was performed at 3 time points. Cox regression and Kaplan–Meier method were used for the association with Progression-free survival (PFS). Changes in body composition parameters were described in means and compared using paired sampled T test.

Results

Baseline sarcopenia was present in 40% of patients and associated with a significantly worse PFS compared to patients without sarcopenia (20.8 vs 9.6 months, HR 2.52; 95% CI 1.02–6.19, p = 0.037). Patients with higher visceral fat index and higher visceral fat density had better PFS (20.8 vs 10.4 months, HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.16–0.99 p = 0.041-stratified for treatment line). No significant alterations in body composition parameters during treatment were observed.

Conclusion

Sarcopenia is a potential early marker of poor prognosis among patients with metastatic BC treated with CDK 4/6 inhibitors. CT scan evaluation of sarcopenia and adiposity revealed significant prognostic information. Visceral fat could also play an important role in response to CDK 4/6 inhibitors, deserving further investigation.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Trestini I, Carbognin L, Monteverdi S et al (2018) Clinical implication of changes in body composition and weight in patients with early-stage and metastatic breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 129:54–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ligibel JA, Alfano CM, Courneya KS et al (2014) American Society of Clinical Oncology Position Statement on Obesity and Cancer. J Clin Oncol 32:3568–3574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cho WK, Choi DH, Park W et al (2018) Effect of Body Mass Index on Survival in Breast Cancer Patients According to Subtype, Metabolic Syndrome, and Treatment. Clinical Breast Cancer 18:e1141–e1147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chan DSM, Vieira AR, Aune D et al (2014) Body mass index and survival in women with breast cancer-systematic literature review and meta-analysis of 82 follow-up studies. Ann Oncol 25:1901–1914

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Yerushalmi R, Dong B, Chapman JW et al (2017) Impact of baseline BMI and weight change in CCTG adjuvant breast cancer trials. Ann Oncol 28:1560–1568

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Zewenghiel L, Lindman H, Valachis A (2018) Impact of body mass index on the efficacy of endocrine therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer - A retrospective two-center cohort study. The Breast 40:136–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Charette N, Vandeputte C, Ameye L et al (2019) Prognostic value of adipose tissue and muscle mass in advanced colorectal cancer: a post hoc analysis of two non-randomized phase II trials. BMC Cancer 19:134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Greenlee H, Unger JM, LeBlanc M et al (2017) Association between Body Mass Index and Cancer Survival in a Pooled Analysis of 22 Clinical Trials. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 26:21–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Caan BJ, Feliciano EMC, Kroenke CH (2018) The Importance of Body Composition in Explaining the Overweight Paradox in Cancer—Counterpoint. Cancer Res 78:1906–1912

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Brown JC, Cespedes Feliciano EM, Caan BJ (2018) The evolution of body composition in oncology—epidemiology, clinical trials, and the future of patient care: facts and numbers. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 9:1200–1208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Goetz MP, Toi M, Campone M et al (2017) MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib As Initial Therapy for Advanced Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 35:3638–3646

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hortobagyi GN, Stemmer SM, Burris HA et al (2018) Updated results from MONALEESA-2, a phase III trial of first-line ribociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Ann Oncol 29:1541–1547

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rugo HS, Finn RS, Diéras V et al (2019) Palbociclib plus letrozole as first-line therapy in estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer with extended follow-up. Breast Cancer Res Treat 174:719–729

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Aguilar V, Fajas L (2010) Cycling through metabolism. EMBO Mol Med 2:338–348

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lagarrigue S, Lopez-Mejia IC, Denechaud P-D et al (2015) CDK4 is an essential insulin effector in adipocytes. Journal of Clinical Investigation 126:335–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fajas L (2013) Re-thinking cell cycle regulators: the cross-talk with metabolism. Frontiers in Oncology 3:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hou X, Zhang Y, Li W et al (2018) CDK6 inhibits white to beige fat transition by suppressing RUNX1. Nature Communications 9:1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Iqbal NJ, Lu Z, Liu SM et al (2018) Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 is a preclinical target for diet-induced obesity. JCI Insight 3:e123000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Thibault R, Genton L, Pichard C (2012) Body composition: why, when and for who? Clin Nutr 31:435–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mourtzakis M, Prado CMM, Lieffers JR et al (2008) A practical and precise approach to quantification of body composition in cancer patients using computed tomography images acquired during routine care. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 33:997–1006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Caan BJ, Cespedes Feliciano EM, Prado CM et al (2018) Association of Muscle and Adiposity Measured by Computed Tomography With Survival in Patients With Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer. JAMA Oncol 4:798–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rier HN, Jager A, Sleijfer S et al (2018) Changes in body composition and muscle attenuation during taxane-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 168:95–105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Rier HN, Jager A, Sleijfer S et al (2016) The Prevalence and Prognostic Value of Low Muscle Mass in Cancer Patients: A Review of the Literature. Oncologist 21:1396–1409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Yip C, Dinkel C, Mahajan A et al (2015) Imaging body composition in cancer patients: visceral obesity, sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity may impact on clinical outcome. Insights Imaging 6:489–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kazemi-Bajestani SMR, Mazurak VC, Baracos V (2016) Computed tomography-defined muscle and fat wasting are associated with cancer clinical outcomes. Semin Cell Dev Biol 54:2–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Huang D-D, Wang S-L, Zhuang C-L et al (2015) Sarcopenia, as defined by low muscle mass, strength and physical performance, predicts complications after surgery for colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 17:O256–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Malietzis G, Johns N, Al-Hassi HO et al (2016) Low Muscularity and Myosteatosis Is Related to the Host Systemic Inflammatory Response in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Colorectal Cancer. Ann Surg 263:320–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Prado CMM, Lieffers JR, McCargar LJ et al (2008) Prevalence and clinical implications of sarcopenic obesity in patients with solid tumours of the respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol 9:629–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Prado CMM, Baracos VE, McCargar LJ et al (2007) Body composition as an independent determinant of 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy toxicity. Clin Cancer Res 13:3264–3268

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Rossi F, Valdora F, Bignotti B et al (2019) Evaluation of body Computed Tomography-determined sarcopenia in breast cancer patients and clinical outcomes: A systematic review. Cancer Treat Res Commun 21:100154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 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  Google Scholar 

  32. Rier HN, Jager A, Sleijfer S et al (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  Google Scholar 

  33. Prado CMM, 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  Google Scholar 

  34. Gevorgyan A, Bregni G, Galli G et al (2016) Body mass index and clinical benefit of fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. Tumori 102:e11–14

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Pizzuti L, Natoli C, Gamucci T et al (2017) Anthropometric, clinical and molecular determinants of treatment outcomes in postmenopausal, hormone receptor positive metastatic breast cancer patients treated with fulvestrant: Results from a real word setting. Oncotarget 8:69025–69037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ioannides SJ, Barlow PL, Elwood JM et al (2014) Effect of obesity on aromatase inhibitor efficacy in postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: a systematic review. Breast Cancer Res Treat 147:237–248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Miard S, Fajas L (2005) Atypical transcriptional regulators and cofactors of PPARgamma. Int J Obes (Lond) 29(Suppl 1):S10–12

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Abella A, Dubus P, Malumbres M et al (2005) Cdk4 promotes adipogenesis through PPARgamma activation. Cell Metab 2:239–249

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Fielding RA, Vellas B, Evans WJ, et al: Sarcopenia: an undiagnosed condition in older adults. Current consensus definition: prevalence, etiology, and consequences. International working group on sarcopenia. J Am Med Dir Assoc 12:249–256, 2011

  40. Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Bahat G, Bauer J et al (2019) Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing 48:16–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study has received no funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

MA and CV: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Visualization, writing original draft and writing-review & editing. DE, RC, CDA and AH: Investigation, Validation, Visualization, writing original draft and writing review & editing. MB: Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodoloy, Sotware, Validation, Visualization, writing original draft and writing review & editing. AA and MP: Resources, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. EA: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration, writing- original draft and writing-review & editing. All authors have read and approved this manuscript and ensure this submission is not under consideration elsewhere.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Alice Franzoi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

MAF, CV, AH and CDA: none. DE: Funding for his ESMO fellowship: Novartis. RC: speaker honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca and Janssen, travel grants from AstraZeneca and Pfizer. MB: travel grant and speaker honoraria from Roche/GNE. AA: Advisory role, speaker fees and research funding for his institute from: Roche, Lilly, Amgen, EISAI, BMS, Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, Genomic Health, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Leo Pharma. M.P.: Board Member (Scientific Board): Oncolytics, Radius; Consultant (honoraria): AstraZeneca, Camel-IDS, Crescendo Biologics, Debiopharm, G1 Therapeutics, Genentech, Huya, Immunomedics, Lilly, Menarini, MSD, Novartis, Odonate, Oncolytics, Periphagen, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics; Research grants to her Institute: AstraZeneca, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Radius, Roche-Genentech, Servier, Synthon; Speakers bureau/stock ownership: none. EA: honoraria and advisory board: Roche/GNE, Novartis, Seatle Genetics; travel grants: Roche/GNE, GSK/Novartis; co-principal investigator of the LORELEI trial (NCT02273973). Research grant for his institute: Roche/GNE, Astra-Zeneca, Novartis, and Servier.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.This study was approved by an internal ethics committee (EC3048), and informed consent was not required as patient’s information was retrieved from retrospective review of medical records only. The identity of the patients was kept always anonymously.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 95 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Franzoi, M.A., Vandeputte, C., Eiger, D. et al. Computed tomography-based analyses of baseline body composition parameters and changes in breast cancer patients under treatment with CDK 4/6 inhibitors. Breast Cancer Res Treat 181, 199–209 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05617-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05617-2

Keywords

Navigation