Body mass index (BMI) and simple counts of weight are easy and available tools in the clinic and in research. Recent studies have shown that cancer patients with a low normal BMI (or those with weight loss) have worse outcomes than obese patients. These results suggest that obesity has a protective effect and has been termed the “obesity paradox.” In this commentary, we discuss hypothetical explanations and take a step beyond BMI or simple weights alone to present other useful and more specific body composition metrics, such as muscle tissue mass, visceral fat mass, and subcutaneous fat mass. Body composition is highly variable between individuals with significant differences seen between various races and ages. Therefore, it is critical to consider that patients with the exact same BMI can have significantly different body compositions and different outcomes. We encourage further studies to examine body composition beyond BMI and to use other body composition metrics to develop individualized treatments and intervention strategies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(1); 13–16. ©2017 AACR.

See all the articles in this CEBP Focus section, “The Obesity Paradox in Cancer: Evidence and New Directions.”

The usage of body mass index (BMI) to characterize the different body/obesity types has been commonplace for decades, yet limitations persist in its use. BMI is a calculated value [body weight (kg) divided by square height (m2)] and exists as an easy and simple tool in the clinic and in research to differentiate and categorize patients as underweight (BMI < 18.5), normal weight (18.5–24.99), overweight (25–29.99), and obese (>30). In a large-scale British study (more than 5 million individuals; ref. 1), BMI was significantly associated with 17 of 22 cancers, among them liver, colon, and postmenopausal breast cancers. Although obesity in the general population is associated with an increased risk of death (2), there are conflicting reports about the relationship between obesity and mortality among individuals with cancer and several other chronic diseases (3–5). This phenomenon, known as the “obesity paradox,” suggests a potential protective effect in overweight and mildly obese patients. Mortality curves for BMI for any population are usually U-shaped (with increased mortality at both ends), but the debate primarily lies as to where the nadir for mortality exists (6). Two studies in this issue evaluate the association of weight changes in a large cohort of patients with two common early-stage cancers: breast and colorectal. Cespedes Feliciano and colleagues concluded that weight loss and gain are equally common after breast cancer, and weight loss is a consistent marker of mortality risk (7). Meyerhardt and colleagues demonstrated that weight loss after a colorectal cancer diagnosis was associated with worse cancer-specific and overall mortality (8). The study by Greenlee and colleagues is a pooled analysis of 22 clinical trials from SWOG (n = 11,724) and showed that BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 was associated with better overall survival among men (HR = 0.82; P = 0.003), unlike in women (HR = 1.04; P = 0.86; ref. 9). Both methodologic and physiologic explanations exist for explaining this phenomenon and these results, but what is the clinician supposed to recommend patients today? Should we enter the clinic tomorrow and tell our patients to gain weight? Or stop encouraging them to keep within the “normal” range of BMI?

Many hypothetical explanations exist that help explain the obesity paradox. One of them is the collider stratification bias (a form of selection bias) that may, in part, explain the phenomenon (10, 11), but this unlikely fully accounts for the observed findings (12). The increased nutritional reserves provided by excess fat stores and higher lean body mass in obese patients (13) may provide an added advantage during periods of acute illness (14). In addition, it is plausible that lower BMI categories disproportionately include sicker patients and, in turn, are at a higher risk of mortality. The loss of weight could also be associated with smoking and related to other comorbidities, which can be another confounder (15). Weight loss among even the general older adult population is associated with frailty and an increased mortality risk (16, 17). Weight loss at a cancer diagnosis is often a marker of more aggressive cancer and/or advanced disease. Even in earlier stage patients, lower weights may be a marker of subclinical tumor activity. Changes in weight can be seen over 6 months prior to a cancer diagnosis, and appreciable subclinical impacts on lipid metabolism can start as early as 2 years before a diagnosis is made (18). Of note, the impact of cancer on body metabolism and cachexia varies greatly by tumor type and stage, and clearly, cancer can have a significant impact on weight, and the distinction between intentional and nonintentional weight loss is a major issue (19).

Although BMI and simple weight measurements are the easiest and most available clinical measures and have helped gain an enormous amount of knowledge regarding the relationship of obesity and cancer prevention as well as cardiovascular diseases (20), one major flaw and limitation of both are their inability to differentiate fat and muscle mass. Body composition and BMI differ considerably between different ethnic groups (see Table 1). While African Americans have higher BMI on average, they also have higher lean body mass (LBM) and subcutaneous fat with lower visceral fat, whereas Caucasians generally have higher visceral fat and lower subcutaneous and LBM. Of note, South Asians have almost “normal” average BMI but have a lower LBM and higher visceral fat than African Americans (21). Age is another factor associated with alterations in body composition, and with age, there is a decrease in muscle mass and strength, known as sarcopenia (22–24). The assumption that adults have an optimal weight range (corrected for height) is probably sound, but assuming that this is the same for all individuals regardless of ethnicity, age, and health status is challenging. Furthermore, nutritional status is also an important component, and BMI/weight is not always an adequate indicator of nutrition status (25).

Table 1.

Differences in body composition between various ethnic groups

BMIa (kg/m2) meanLean mass area (cm2) mean (95% CI)Visceral fat (cm2) mean (95% CI)Subcutaneous fat (cm2) mean (95% CI)
White N = 785 27.8 98 (95–100) 159 (153–165) 253 (243–264) 
African American N = 407 30.2 104 (101–108) 128 (120–136) 298 (283–313) 
Latino N = 501 29.4 99 (95–102) 164 (157–172) 264 (250–278) 
South Asian N = 903 25.8 93 (91–69) 134 (129–140) 237 (227–246) 
Chinese American N = 251 24 89 (85–94) 114 (104–125) 177 (160–195) 
BMIa (kg/m2) meanLean mass area (cm2) mean (95% CI)Visceral fat (cm2) mean (95% CI)Subcutaneous fat (cm2) mean (95% CI)
White N = 785 27.8 98 (95–100) 159 (153–165) 253 (243–264) 
African American N = 407 30.2 104 (101–108) 128 (120–136) 298 (283–313) 
Latino N = 501 29.4 99 (95–102) 164 (157–172) 264 (250–278) 
South Asian N = 903 25.8 93 (91–69) 134 (129–140) 237 (227–246) 
Chinese American N = 251 24 89 (85–94) 114 (104–125) 177 (160–195) 

NOTE: Reprinted by permission from Macmillan Publishers Ltd.: International Journal of Obesity (21), copyright 2016.

Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.

aBMI recorded from the all MASALA/MESA studies.

In oncology, body composition has been shown to have a substantial impact on outcomes (26, 27). Many studies demonstrate an association between different indices and prognosis in different tumors. Table 2 highlights the multitude of body measures used in the literature, their measurement calculations, and some example findings in oncology. In a recent meta-analysis, sarcopenia (low muscle mass) derived from CT imaging was significantly associated with inferior survival across tumor types and disease stages (27). Assuming the impact of weight is the same regardless of the degree of adiposity or skeletal muscle ignores a growing body of evidence within oncology and elsewhere. Patients with lower muscle mass have higher rates of surgical complications (28), which may delay the preferable timing of adjuvant treatment initiation, a known factor for inferior outcomes (29). In addition, sarcopenic patients have higher rates of treatment toxicity (26, 30, 31) that, in turn, can cause dose delays and reductions, resulting in lower dose intensity and worse outcomes (32, 33). Also, recent evidence in a large cohort of patients with early-stage colorectal cancer demonstrated that decreased muscle mass and attenuation was significantly associated with markers of systemic inflammation, but neither have correlation with BMI. This highlights the significant interaction of body composition and the inflammation process that can impact metabolism, weight loss, and body resistance to tumor growth (34). Although body composition analysis is much more accurate in quantifying muscle mass and adiposity, it is not yet a standard component of clinical care in oncology or elsewhere.

Table 2.

Selected body measures and their association with cancer outcomes

Body measureMethod of calculation/measureExamples for prognostic evidence
Weight at diagnosis Weight scale (kg) Breast cancer-worse OS (HR = 1.31; 95% CI, 1.17–1.46) for heavier vs. lighter (43) 
BMI at diagnosis Weight scale/meter weight (kg)/height (m2Contradicting evidence: 
  - Better survival for higher BMI in men—SWOG trials (HR = 0.82; P = 0.003; ref. 9) 
  - Worse survival in early breast cancer with higher BMI (HR = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.09–2.01; ref. 44) 
Weight changes after diagnosis Weight scale (kg) Contradicting evidence in early breast cancer 
  - Meta-analysis weight gain ≥10.0% associated with all-cause mortality (HR = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09 –1.39; ref. 45) 
  Breast cancer large cohort—weight loss ≥10% was associated with worse survival, all-cause mortality 2.63 (2.12–3.26; ref. 7) 
  Colorectal cancer–specific mortality (HR = 3.20; 95% CI, 2.33–4.39; P < 0.0001; ref. 8) 
Sarcopenia (low muscle mass) DEXA/CT scan/MRI Recent meta-analysis in different types and stages (HR = 1.44; 95% CI, 1.32–1.56; P < 0.001; ref. 27) 
  HEAL—early breast cancer survivors—higher overall mortality in sarcopenic patients (HR = 2.86; 95 % CI, 1.67–4.89; ref. 46) 
Muscle radiodensity [mean (HU)] CT scan/MRI Several studies low radiodensity associated with short survival (41, 42) 
SAT CT scan/MRI Advanced prostate cancer- in multivariate analysis, SAT index was statistically significant predictors of OS (P = 0.036; ref. 47) 
VAT CT scan/MRI Mainly reported VAT/SAT ratio-increasing ratio result in better OS (48) 
  Higher VAT associated with worse survival (49, 50) 
MAMC Measuring tape (cm) Better OS with normal MAMC (HR = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.09–0.5; ref. 51) 
Body measureMethod of calculation/measureExamples for prognostic evidence
Weight at diagnosis Weight scale (kg) Breast cancer-worse OS (HR = 1.31; 95% CI, 1.17–1.46) for heavier vs. lighter (43) 
BMI at diagnosis Weight scale/meter weight (kg)/height (m2Contradicting evidence: 
  - Better survival for higher BMI in men—SWOG trials (HR = 0.82; P = 0.003; ref. 9) 
  - Worse survival in early breast cancer with higher BMI (HR = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.09–2.01; ref. 44) 
Weight changes after diagnosis Weight scale (kg) Contradicting evidence in early breast cancer 
  - Meta-analysis weight gain ≥10.0% associated with all-cause mortality (HR = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09 –1.39; ref. 45) 
  Breast cancer large cohort—weight loss ≥10% was associated with worse survival, all-cause mortality 2.63 (2.12–3.26; ref. 7) 
  Colorectal cancer–specific mortality (HR = 3.20; 95% CI, 2.33–4.39; P < 0.0001; ref. 8) 
Sarcopenia (low muscle mass) DEXA/CT scan/MRI Recent meta-analysis in different types and stages (HR = 1.44; 95% CI, 1.32–1.56; P < 0.001; ref. 27) 
  HEAL—early breast cancer survivors—higher overall mortality in sarcopenic patients (HR = 2.86; 95 % CI, 1.67–4.89; ref. 46) 
Muscle radiodensity [mean (HU)] CT scan/MRI Several studies low radiodensity associated with short survival (41, 42) 
SAT CT scan/MRI Advanced prostate cancer- in multivariate analysis, SAT index was statistically significant predictors of OS (P = 0.036; ref. 47) 
VAT CT scan/MRI Mainly reported VAT/SAT ratio-increasing ratio result in better OS (48) 
  Higher VAT associated with worse survival (49, 50) 
MAMC Measuring tape (cm) Better OS with normal MAMC (HR = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.09–0.5; ref. 51) 

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; CT, computerized tomography; DEXA, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; HU, Hounsfield unit; MAMC, mid-arm muscle circumference; MRI, Magnetic Resonance Imaging; SAT, subcutaneous adipose tissue; SWOG, Southwest Oncology Group; VAT, visceral adipose tissue.

In cancer, as well as other diseases, physical activity should be discussed alongside body composition, as physical activity has an important influence on the prevention of cancer (35) and survival after diagnosis (36). Physical activity can also increase muscle mass and augment metabolic and hormonal axes (37), as well as be used as an important intervention tool.

The evolving field of personalized medicine in oncology is playing an increasing role in cancer prevention, diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutics (38). In the last decade, there has been great progress in understanding tumor characteristics, including proliferation rate, mutation load, and type, and when utilized to guide cancer therapy, there is a potential for improved survival (39, 40). The impact of host factors remains underappreciated and poorly understood. Personalized medicine should go beyond only tumor genetics and pharmacogenomics but should also include a patient's body composition, physical function, and comorbidities. These factors can also greatly impact treatment decisions and drug dosing with an overall impact on outcomes. In the same way that treatments in oncology are rarely one size fits all, the “right” weight for a given individual is likely dependent on a multitude of factors and should also be individualized.

The studies in this issue highlight the importance of body measures in cancer and add to the growing literature in this emerging field. So what should clinicians be telling their patients regarding weight loss or weight gain after a cancer diagnosis? The answer is complex and not yet clear with many unresolved questions remaining. Is weight loss a sign for tumor activity, and if it is, can we even reverse that process? Will future randomized control trials with the goal of achieving the “right” BMI improve survival? Will it be the right BMI or the right body composition? Is it the amount of LBM or the ratio between the LBM to fat (adiposity/muscularity ratio)? Is it the size/quantity of muscle or as recent evidence has shown, the quality of muscle (radiodensity) that impacts survival (41, 42)? To date, we have more questions than answers, and we need to gear up with focused studies about the impact of body composition on different outcomes and step forward with intervention and prevention strategies.

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.

Conception and design: S.S. Shachar, G.R. Williams

Development of methodology: S.S. Shachar

Acquisition of data (provided animals, acquired and managed patients, provided facilities, etc.): S.S. Shachar

Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics, computational analysis): S.S. Shachar

Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript: S.S. Shachar, G.R. Williams

This work was supported, in part, by the UNC Oncology Clinical Translational Research Training Program (NCI 5K12CA120780-07; to G.R. Williams).

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1.
Bhaskaran
K
,
Douglas
I
,
Forbes
H
,
dos-Santos-Silva
I
,
Leon
DA
,
Smeeth
L
. 
Body-mass index and risk of 22 specific cancers: a population-based cohort study of 5.24 million UK adults
.
Lancet
2014
;
384
:
755
65
.
2.
Flegal
KM
,
Kit
BK
,
Orpana
H
,
Graubard
BI
. 
Association of all-cause mortality with overweight and obesity using standard body mass index categories: a systematic review and meta-analysis
.
JAMA
2013
;
309
:
71
82
.
3.
Tobias
DK
,
Pan
A
,
Jackson
CL
,
O'Reilly
EJ
,
Ding
EL
,
Willett
WC
, et al
Body-mass index and mortality among adults with incident type 2 diabetes
.
N Engl J Med
2014
;
370
:
233
44
.
4.
Andersen
KK
,
Olsen
TS
. 
The obesity paradox in stroke: lower mortality and lower risk of readmission for recurrent stroke in obese stroke patients
.
Int J Stroke
2013 Mar 12
.
[Epub ahead of print]
.
5.
Curtis
JP
,
Selter
JG
,
Wang
Y
,
Rathore
SS
,
Jovin
IS
,
Jadbabaie
F
, et al
The obesity paradox: body mass index and outcomes in patients with heart failure
.
Arch Intern Med
2005
;
165
:
55
61
.
6.
Dixon
JB
,
Egger
GJ
. 
A narrow view of optimal weight for health generates the obesity paradox
.
Am J Clin Nutr
2014
;
99
:
969
70
.
7.
Cespedes
Feliciano EM
,
Kroenke
CH
,
Bradshaw
PT
,
Chen
WY
,
Prado
CM
,
Weltzien
EK
, et al
Postdiagnosis weight change and survival following a diagnosis of early-stage breast cancer
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2017
;
26
:
44
50
.
8.
Meyerhardt
JA
,
Kroenke
CH
,
Prado
CM
,
Kwan
ML
,
Castillo
A
,
Weltzien
E
, et al
Association of weight change after colorectal cancer diagnosis and outcomes in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California population
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2017
;
26
:
30
7
.
9.
Greenlee
H
,
Unger
JM
,
LeBlanc
M
,
Ramsey
S
,
Hershman
DL
. 
Association between body mass index (BMI) and cancer survival in a pooled analysis of 22 clinical trials
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2017
;
26
:
21
9
.
10.
Colantonio
LD
,
Burrone
MS
. 
Factors involved in the paradox of reverse epidemiology
.
Clin Nutr
2014
;
33
:
729
.
11.
Banack
HR
,
Kaufman
JS
. 
From bad to worse: collider stratification amplifies confounding bias in the "obesity paradox"
.
Eur J Epidemiol
2015
;
30
:
1111
4
.
12.
Sperrin
M
,
Candlish
J
,
Badrick
E
,
Renehan
A
,
Buchan
I
. 
Collider bias is only a partial explanation for the obesity paradox
.
Epidemiology
2016
;
27
:
525
30
.
13.
Broughman
JR
,
Williams
GR
,
Deal
AM
,
Yu
H
,
Nyrop
KA
,
Alston
SM
, et al
Prevalence of sarcopenia in older patients with colorectal cancer
.
J Geriatr Oncol
2015
;
6
:
442
5
.
14.
Gioulbasanis
I
,
Baracos
VE
,
Giannousi
Z
,
Xyrafas
A
,
Martin
L
,
Georgoulias
V
, et al
Baseline nutritional evaluation in metastatic lung cancer patients: mini nutritional assessment versus weight loss history
.
Ann Oncol
2011
;
22
:
835
41
.
15.
Klesges
RC
,
Meyers
AW
,
Klesges
LM
,
La Vasque
ME
. 
Smoking, body weight, and their effects on smoking behavior: a comprehensive review of the literature
.
Psychol Bull
1989
;
106
:
204
30
.
16.
Newman
AB
,
Yanez
D
,
Harris
T
,
Duxbury
A
,
Enright
PL
,
Fried
LP
. 
Weight change in old age and its association with mortality
.
J Am Geriatr Soc
2001
;
49
:
1309
18
.
17.
Wallace
JI
,
Schwartz
RS
. 
Involuntary weight loss in elderly outpatients: recognition, etiologies, and treatment
.
Clin Geriatr Med
1997
;
13
:
717
35
.
18.
Kritchevsky
SB
,
Wilcosky
TC
,
Morris
DL
,
Truong
KN
,
Tyroler
HA
. 
Changes in plasma lipid and lipoprotein cholesterol and weight prior to the diagnosis of cancer
.
Cancer Res
1991
;
51
:
3198
203
.
19.
Petruzzelli
M
,
Wagner
EF
. 
Mechanisms of metabolic dysfunction in cancer-associated cachexia
.
Genes Dev
2016
;
30
:
489
501
.
20.
Twig
G
,
Yaniv
G
,
Levine
H
,
Leiba
A
,
Goldberger
N
,
Derazne
E
, et al
Body-mass index in 2.3 million adolescents and cardiovascular death in adulthood
.
N Engl J Med
2016
;
374
:
2430
40
.
21.
Shah
AD
,
Kandula
NR
,
Lin
F
,
Allison
MA
,
Carr
J
,
Herrington
D
, et al
Less favorable body composition and adipokines in South Asians compared with other US ethnic groups: results from the MASALA and MESA studies
.
Int J Obes
2016
;
40
:
639
45
.
22.
Cruz-Jentoft
AJ
,
Landi
F
,
Schneider
SM
,
Zuniga
C
,
Arai
H
,
Boirie
Y
, et al
Prevalence of and interventions for sarcopenia in ageing adults: a systematic review. Report of the International Sarcopenia Initiative (EWGSOP and IWGS)
.
Age Ageing
2014
;
43
:
748
59
.
23.
Cruz-Jentoft
AJ
,
Landi
F
,
Topinkova
E
,
Michel
JP
. 
Understanding sarcopenia as a geriatric syndrome
.
Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care
2010
;
13
:
1
7
.
24.
Cruz-Jentoft
AJ
,
Baeyens
JP
,
Bauer
JM
,
Boirie
Y
,
Cederholm
T
,
Landi
F
, et al
Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: report of the European working group on Sarcopenia in older people
.
Age Ageing
2010
;
39
:
412
23
.
25.
Habicht
JP
. 
Some characteristics of indicators of nutritional status for use in screening and surveillance
.
Am J Clin Nutr
1980
;
33
:
531
5
.
26.
Kazemi-Bajestani
SM
,
Mazurak
VC
,
Baracos
V
. 
Computed tomography-defined muscle and fat wasting are associated with cancer clinical outcomes
.
Semin Cell Dev Biol
2016
;
54
:
2
10
.
27.
Shachar
SS
,
Williams
GR
,
Muss
HB
,
Nishijima
TF
. 
Prognostic value of sarcopenia in adults with solid tumours: a meta-analysis and systematic review
.
Eur J Cancer
2016
;
57
:
58
67
.
28.
Zhuang
CL
,
Huang
DD
,
Pang
WY
,
Zhou
CJ
,
Wang
SL
,
Lou
N
, et al
Sarcopenia is an independent predictor of severe postoperative complications and long-term survival after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: analysis from a large-scale cohort
.
Medicine
2016
;
95
:
e3164
.
29.
Gagliato Dde
M
,
Gonzalez-Angulo
AM
,
Lei
X
,
Theriault
RL
,
Giordano
SH
,
Valero
V
, et al
Clinical impact of delaying initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2014
;
32
:
735
44
.
30.
Prado
CM
,
Lima
IS
,
Baracos
VE
,
Bies
RR
,
McCargar
LJ
,
Reiman
T
, et al
An exploratory study of body composition as a determinant of epirubicin pharmacokinetics and toxicity
.
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol
2011
;
67
:
93
101
.
31.
Prado
CM
,
Baracos
VE
,
McCargar
LJ
,
Reiman
T
,
Mourtzakis
M
,
Tonkin
K
, et al
Sarcopenia as a determinant of chemotherapy toxicity and time to tumor progression in metastatic breast cancer patients receiving capecitabine treatment
.
Clin Cancer Res
2009
;
15
:
2920
6
.
32.
Joseph
N
,
Clark
RM
,
Dizon
DS
,
Lee
MS
,
Goodman
A
,
Boruta
D
 Jr
, et al
Delay in chemotherapy administration impacts survival in elderly patients with epithelial ovarian cancer
.
Gynecol Oncol
2015
;
137
:
401
5
.
33.
Wood
WC
,
Budman
DR
,
Korzun
AH
,
Cooper
MR
,
Younger
J
,
Hart
RD
, et al
Dose and dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II, node-positive breast carcinoma
.
N Engl J Med
1994
;
330
:
1253
9
.
34.
Malietzis
G
,
Johns
N
,
Al-Hassi
HO
,
Knight
SC
,
Kennedy
RH
,
Fearon
KC
, et al
Low muscularity and myosteatosis is related to the host systemic inflammatory response in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer
.
Ann Surg
2016
;
263
:
320
5
.
35.
Moore
SC
,
Lee
IM
,
Weiderpass
E
,
Campbell
PT
,
Sampson
JN
,
Kitahara
CM
, et al
Association of leisure-time physical activity with risk of 26 types of cancer in 1.44 million adults
.
JAMA Intern Med
2016
;
176
:
816
25
.
36.
Holmes
MD
,
Chen
WY
,
Feskanich
D
,
Kroenke
CH
,
Colditz
GA
. 
Physical activity and survival after breast cancer diagnosis
.
JAMA
2005
;
293
:
2479
86
.
37.
Engel
F
,
Hartel
S
,
Wagner
MO
,
Strahler
J
,
Bos
K
,
Sperlich
B
. 
Hormonal, metabolic, and cardiorespiratory responses of young and adult athletes to a single session of high-intensity cycle exercise
.
Pediatr Exerc Sci
2014
;
26
:
485
94
.
38.
Jackson
SE
,
Chester
JD
. 
Personalised cancer medicine
.
Int J Cancer
. 
2015
;
137
:
262
6
.
39.
Baselga
J
,
Cortes
J
,
Kim
SB
,
Im
SA
,
Hegg
R
,
Im
YH
, et al
Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer
.
N Engl J Med
2012
;
366
:
109
19
.
40.
Shaw
AT
,
Kim
DW
,
Nakagawa
K
,
Seto
T
,
Crino
L
,
Ahn
MJ
, et al
Crizotinib versus chemotherapy in advanced ALK-positive lung cancer
.
N Engl J Med
2013
;
368
:
2385
94
.
41.
Sjøblom
B
,
Grønberg
BH
,
Wentzel-Larsen
T
,
Baracos
VE
,
Hjermstad
MJ
,
Aass
N
, et al
Skeletal muscle radiodensity is prognostic for survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer
.
Clin Nutr
2016 Apr 1
.
[Epub ahead of print]
.
42.
Blauwhoff-Buskermolen
S
,
Versteeg
KS
,
de van der Schueren
MA
,
den Braver
NR
,
Berkhof
J
,
Langius
JA
, et al
Loss of muscle mass during chemotherapy is predictive for poor survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2016
;
34
:
1339
44
.
43.
Niraula
S
,
Ocana
A
,
Ennis
M
,
Goodwin
PJ
. 
Body size and breast cancer prognosis in relation to hormone receptor and menopausal status: a meta-analysis
.
Breast Cancer Res Treat
2012
;
134
:
769
81
.
44.
Abrahamson
PE
,
Gammon
MD
,
Lund
MJ
,
Flagg
EW
,
Porter
PL
,
Stevens
J
, et al
General and abdominal obesity and survival among young women with breast cancer
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2006
;
15
:
1871
7
.
45.
Playdon
MC
,
Bracken
MB
,
Sanft
TB
,
Ligibel
JA
,
Harrigan
M
,
Irwin
ML
. 
Weight gain after breast cancer diagnosis and all-cause mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2015
;
107
;
djv275
.
46.
Villasenor
A
,
Ballard-Barbash
R
,
Baumgartner
K
,
Baumgartner
R
,
Bernstein
L
,
McTiernan
A
, et al
Prevalence and prognostic effect of sarcopenia in breast cancer survivors: the HEAL Study
.
J Cancer Surviv
2012
;
6
:
398
406
.
47.
Antoun
S
,
Bayar
A
,
Ileana
E
,
Laplanche
A
,
Fizazi
K
,
di Palma
M
, et al
High subcutaneous adipose tissue predicts the prognosis in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients in post chemotherapy setting
.
Eur J Cancer
2015
;
51
:
2570
7
.
48.
Ballian
N
,
Lubner
MG
,
Munoz
A
,
Harms
BA
,
Heise
CP
,
Foley
EF
, et al
Visceral obesity is associated with outcomes of total mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma
.
J Surg Oncol
2012
;
105
:
365
70
.
49.
Balentine
CJ
,
Enriquez
J
,
Fisher
W
,
Hodges
S
,
Bansal
V
,
Sansgiry
S
, et al
Intra-abdominal fat predicts survival in pancreatic cancer
.
J Gastrointest Surg
2010
;
14
:
1832
7
.
50.
Ladoire
S
,
Bonnetain
F
,
Gauthier
M
,
Zanetta
S
,
Petit
JM
,
Guiu
S
, et al
Visceral fat area as a new independent predictive factor of survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with antiangiogenic agents
.
Oncologist
2011
;
16
:
71
81
.
51.
Tartari
RF
,
Ulbrich-Kulczynski
JM
,
Filho
AF
. 
Measurement of mid-arm muscle circumference and prognosis in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer patients
.
Oncol Lett
2013
;
5
:
1063
7
.