Clinical Application of Artificial Intelligence-Based Computed Tomography Analysis of Myosteatosis in Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma

Article information

J Urol Oncol. 2024;22(3):237-245
Publication date (electronic) : 2024 November 30
doi : https://doi.org/10.22465/juo.244800880044
1Department of Urology, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, Korea
2Department of Radiology, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, Korea
3Department of Applied Bioengineering, Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
4ClariPi Research, Seoul, Korea
Corresponding author: Hong Koo Ha Department of Urology, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, 179 Gudeok-ro, Seo-gu, Busan 49241, Korea Email: hongkooha@pusan.ac.kr
Received 2024 September 11; Revised 2024 November 6; Accepted 2024 November 19.

Abstract

Purpose

Myosteatosis, defined as fat infiltration in muscle tissue, has been linked to poor outcomes in various cancers. However, the prognostic impact of myosteatosis on renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains poorly understood. This study evaluated the predictive value of myosteatosis based on an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven computed tomography (CT) analysis in patients with localized RCC who underwent partial nephrectomy.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 170 patients with localized RCC who underwent partial nephrectomy at a single institution between 2011 and 2017. Myosteatosis was assessed on CT scans using an AI-based tool. The patients were categorized into 2 groups according to the presence or absence of myosteatosis. The clinical outcomes, including disease-free survival (DFS), were compared to determine the prognostic significance of myosteatosis.

Results

Of 170 patients, 36 (21.2%) were diagnosed with myosteatosis. These patients were older and had a higher body mass index. The myosteatosis group had a higher proportion of females than the no myosteatosis group. Lymphovascular invasion and tumor necrosis were prevalent pathological features in patients with myosteatosis. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that myosteatosis was associated with significantly shorter DFS (p<0.05). Multivariate analysis confirmed that myosteatosis independently predicted adverse outcomes in patients with localized RCC.

Conclusion

AI-based CT analysis of myosteatosis is a reliable method for improving the risk stratification of patients with localized RCC. Patients with myosteatosis demonstrate poor pathological features and shorter DFS. These findings highlight the potential of AI-driven body composition analysis to refine prognostic models and personalized treatment strategies.

INTRODUCTION

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies affecting kidneys accounting for approximately 90% of all kidney cancers. Although advancements in early detection and surgical techniques have improved the prognosis of patients with localized RCC, identifying additional prognostic factors remains crucial to refine risk stratification and treatment approaches [1].

Recently, the growing focus has been placed on body composition, particularly sarcopenia and myosteatosis, as important predictors of cancer outcomes. Sarcopenia, defined as the loss of skeletal muscle mass and strength, has been extensively studied and is linked to poor oncologic outcomes in various cancers, including pancreatic and gastrointestinal malignancies [2]. Myosteatosis, characterized by increased fat infiltration within the muscle tissue, represents not only a loss of muscle mass but also a decrease in muscle quality, which has been associated with adverse outcomes, such as reduced survival and increased postoperative complications [3].

The prognostic impact of myosteatosis has been well documented in gastric, pancreatic, and metastatic cancers, where the condition has been linked to poor survival and treatment-related toxicity [4,5]. Additionally, studies examining the variability in skeletal muscle radiodensity in patients with metastatic cancer have demonstrated that muscle quality, including radiodensity, is significantly associated with adverse outcomes, further supporting the significance of body composition in cancer prognosis [6]. Despite its significance in other cancers, the role of myosteatosis in RCC remains unclear. Although sarcopenia has been studied in RCC, a notable lack of dedicated research exists examining the specific impact of myosteatosis on the survival and outcomes of patients with RCC. This gap in the literature underscores the need for further investigations into the prognostic significance of myosteatosis in RCC.

Manual and semiautomated methods used to assess myosteatosis have limitations including labor intensity, variability, and lack of accuracy, which can hinder consistent results [7,8]. To overcome these challenges, we utilized an artificial intelligence (AI)-based approach to analyze preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans and evaluate myosteatosis in patients with RCC. Although the use of AI-driven body composition analysis tools is becoming increasingly common in oncology, their application in RCC remains limited. By employing this automated method, we aimed to enhance the precision and reproducibility of the analysis. This study further assessed the prognostic value of AI-based myosteatosis evaluation for predicting disease-free survival (DFS) and adverse pathological outcomes in patients with localized RCC undergoing nephrectomy, addressing a critical gap in the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the prognostic impact of myosteatosis on DFS and pathological outcomes in patients with localized RCC who underwent partial nephrectomy. Preoperative CT scans were analyzed using an AI-based tool to evaluate skeletal muscle quality, with a focus on the presence of myosteatosis. Clinical and pathological data were collected from the patient’s medical records. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether myosteatosis is an independent predictor of oncologic outcomes in this patient cohort.

This study included patients who underwent surgery between 2011 and 2017. Patients diagnosed with localized RCC and treated with a partial nephrectomy were included. To be eligible, patients were required to undergo preoperative abdominal CT scans performed within 3 months before surgery. Noncontrast axial-view CT images were specifically utilized for body composition analysis to assess myosteatosis. Patients were excluded if they had incomplete clinical data or missing follow-up information, which could compromise the accuracy of survival and pathological outcome analyses. Additionally, patients with metastatic RCC at the time of diagnosis were excluded to specifically examine the effect of myosteatosis on the localized RCC cohort.

The demographic data included age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). Furthermore, BMI was classified according to the Korean Society for the Study of Obesity guidelines, which define overweight as a BMI≥23 kg/m2 and obesity as a BMI ≥25 kg/m2 [9]. These thresholds were based on the increased risk of metabolic complications in the Korean population, even at low BMI. In addition to BMI, comorbidities and medical history, including the presence of hypertension and diabetes, were documented for each patient.

Preoperative abdominal CT scans obtained within 3 months before surgery were analyzed using the AI-based muscle analysis software (ClariSarco, ClariPi, Seoul, Korea; https://claripi.com/clarisarco2). This software used 2 deep learning models to assess the abdominal muscle composition in CT images. When the CT data is input into the tool, the first model localizes the vertebral bodies (T12–L4) on the reconstructed image by maximum intensity projection method. Once the L3 level is identified, a second model automatically segments the abdominal muscle areas with a 2-dimensional U-Net architecture (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

Schematics for abdomen muscle analysis algorithm in ClariSarco. The abdominal computed tomography (CT) image is used for both finding the location of third lumbar spine (L3) level and segmentation of the abdominal muscular regions. For the L3-level localization (green rectangular box), the CT image is projected to anterior-posterior direction using maximum intensity projection (MIP) method, and the MIP image is input to the convolutional neural network (CNN)-based detection module. Simultaneously, the CT image is segmented by UNet-based CNN-module generating abdominal muscular region mask. Intermuscular adipose tissue area (IMATA), low attenuation muscle area (LAMA) and normal attenuation area (NAMA) were defined within the muxcular region based on CT-density (Hounsfield unit). All the information was used for calculating the skeletal muscle index and myosteatosis percentage defined as (LAMA+NAMA)/height2 and (1-NAMA/TAMA) ×100, respectively. AI, artificial intelligence; SMA, skeletal muscle area.

The segmentation process assesses key muscle components, including intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT), low attenuation muscle area (LAMA), normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA), skeletal muscle area (SMA), and total abdominal muscle area (TAMA). These areas are defined by Hounsfield unit (HU) ranges: NAMA (30 to 150 HU), LAMA (-29 to 29 HU), and IMAT (-190 to -30 HU). The SMA is the sum of the LAMA and NAMA, whereas the TAMA includes the IMAT, LAMA, and NAMA. Utilizing these measurements, BMI, skeletal muscle index, and myosteatosis percentage (calculated as 100×[1-NAMA/TAMA]) were derived for each patient (Fig. 2) [10,11].

Fig. 2.

Abdominal muscle segmentation and tissue attenuation analysis. This figure illustrates abdominal muscle segmentation at the L3 vertebral level using computed tomography (CT) imaging. The tissue attenuation histogram shows the distribution of muscle density, with the areas categorized into intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT), low attenuation muscle area (LAMA), and normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA). HU, Hounsfield unit; BMI, body mass index; SMI, skeletal muscle index.

Myosteatosis was assessed using the NAMA-to-TAMA ratio with predefined sex-specific cutoff values derived from the study of Kim et al. [12] on a Korean population. Based on their findings, we used a threshold of 33.6% or higher for male patients and 34.9% for female patients to reflect significant fat infiltration within muscle tissue. These cutoff values were established based on a T score of-2, reflecting a clinically relevant level of fat infiltration. This differentiation considers the physiological differences in muscle composition between sexes. A low NAMA-to-TAMA ratio indicates a high degree of fat infiltration, signifying poor muscle quality and an increased likelihood of myosteatosis (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3.

Representative computed tomography (CT) analysis of myosteatosis and no myosteatosis groups. Comparison of myosteatosis (bottom) and no myosteatosis (top) groups. The myosteatosis case shows a reduced normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA) proportion within the total abdominal muscle area (TAMA), indicating greater fat infiltration in muscle tissue. SMA, skeletal muscle area; HU, Hounsfield unit; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, intermuscular adipose tissue.

Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the presence or absence of myosteatosis to compare pathologic results and prognostic outcomes. Key characteristics, such as tumor site, histology, tumor size, Fuhrman/World Health Organization grade, and extent of invasion (including capsule invasion, extension into the perirenal fat, and lymphovascular invasion) were recorded. The primary tumor (T) stage was determined according to the TNM classification. Additionally, DFS was compared between the myosteatosis and no myosteatosis groups to assess the impact of the condition on patient prognosis.

Descriptive statistics were utilized to summarize patient demographics and tumor characteristics, with continuous variables presented as means and standard deviations or medians and interquartile ranges, and categorical variables as frequencies and percentages. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze DFS, with comparisons between the myosteatosis and no myosteatosis groups using the log rank test. Cox proportional hazard regression was employed to identify independent predictors of DFS, adjusting for potential confounders such as age, BMI, and tumor stage. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.

RESULTS

1. Preoperative Patient Characteristics

In this study of 170 patients, 36 (21.2%) were identified with myosteatosis, while 134 (78.8%) did not have the condition (Fig. 3). A significant difference was observed in sex distribution, with a higher proportion of females in the myosteatosis group (61.1%) compared to males (38.9%). In contrast, the no myosteatosis group consisted predominantly of males (76.9%). Patients with myosteatosis were significantly old, with an average age of 64.2 years versus 57.5 years in those without myosteatosis (p<0.05) (Table 1).

Preoperative patients’ characteristics

BMI also differed between the groups, with a higher percentage of patients with myosteatosis classified as overweight or obese (83.3%) than those without myosteatosis (59.7%) (p<0.05). A chi-square test of the BMI distribution across the 3 categories (normal, overweight, and obese) showed a statistically significant difference between the myosteatosis and no myosteatosis groups (p<0.05), indicating that the overall BMI distribution was associated with the presence of myosteatosis. Additionally, the correlation analysis between BMI and myosteatosis percentage showed a statistically significant positive association (Pearson correlation coefficient r=0.319, p<0.001), indicating that patients with a higher BMI tended to exhibit higher levels of myosteatosis. The proportion of patients with an elevated neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (≥3.4) was higher in the myosteatosis group than in the no myosteatosis group; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Overall, myosteatosis was associated with old age, female sex, and an elevated BMI in this patient cohort (Table 1).

2. Pathologic Outcomes

Pathological characteristics of the myosteatosis and no myosteatosis groups were largely comparable. No significant differences were observed in the pT stage distribution (p=0.286) or histologic type (p=0.526), with clear cell carcinoma being the most common type in both groups. The tumor grade also exhibited no significant difference, with similar proportions of low (G1 and G2) and high-grade (G3 and G4) tumors between the groups (p=0.824) (Table 2).

Comparison of pathological characteristics between patients with and without myosteatosis after surgery

However, lymphovascular invasion was significantly more frequent in the myosteatosis group (22.2%) than in the no myosteatosis group (9%) (p<0.05). Furthermore, tumor necrosis was also prevalent in the myosteatosis group (27.8% vs. 5.2%, p<0.05). Other measures of tumor invasion, including renal capsule and perirenal fat invasion, did not differ significantly between the groups (Table 2). In the ccRCC subgroup analysis, the myosteatosis group also demonstrated higher rates of lymphovascular invasion (26.7% vs. 7.8%, p<0.05) and tumor necrosis (30% vs. 5.9%, p<0.05) compared to the no myosteatosis group (Table 3)

Comparison of pathological characteristics between clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients with and without myosteatosis after surgery

3. Survival Analysis

In the analysis of DFS among 170 patients, those with myosteatosis experienced shorter DFS than those without myosteatosis, with median follow-up times of 98.5 months and 101.5 months, respectively. Recurrences were frequent and occurred earlier in the myosteatosis group. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank test demonstrated a statistically significant difference in DFS between the 2 groups (p<0.05) (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.

Kaplan-Meier analysis of disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with and without myosteatosis. Kaplan-Meier curves showing DFS for patients with myosteatosis (red line) and those without myosteatosis (blue line). A statistically significant difference in DFS was observed between the 2 groups (log-rank p<0.05).

In univariate analysis, age, myosteatosis, and margin positivity were significantly associated with DFS (p<0.05). In multivariate Cox regression analysis, myosteatosis remained an independent predictor of DFS with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.50 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18–1.91, p=0.040) [3]. Age was not statistically significant in the multivariate model (p=0.362). Margin positivity was also independently associated with poor DFS (HR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.14–8.12; p<0.001). Additionally, sinus fat invasion displayed a marginally significant association with DFS (HR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.57–4.57; p=0.024) (Table 4).

Univariate and multivariate analysis of disease-free survival in patients with renal cell carcinoma

DISCUSSION

This study highlights that myosteatosis evaluated using AI-driven CT analysis is associated with higher rates of adverse pathological features, such as lymphovascular invasion and tumor necrosis, and is an independent predictor of DFS in patients with localized RCC. The use of AI for preoperative body composition assessment offers a precise and reproducible method for identifying high-risk patients, contributing valuable insights into the limited research on myosteatosis in patients with RCC.

In this study, traditional pathological features, such as tumor necrosis, positive surgical margin, and lymphovascular invasion, which are typically associated with poor oncologic outcomes, showed limited influence on DFS in our early stage RCC cohort treated with partial nephrectomy. Previous studies, including those by Chang et al. [13] and Mouracade et al. [14], have similarly found that these adverse pathological features may have a reduced prognostic impact in early stage, curatively treated RCC.

Previous research has demonstrated the negative impact of myosteatosis on cancer outcomes in various malignancies, including pancreatic and colorectal cancers. For instance, Kim et al. [2] revealed that both sarcopenia and myosteatosis are significant predictors of poor prognosis in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Similarly, Sueda et al. [15] discovered that low muscularity and myosteatosis were associated with poor long-term outcomes in patients undergoing curative surgery for colorectal cancer, further emphasizing the detrimental effects of muscle quality on oncological outcomes. The findings of our study are consistent with those of previous studies, in which myosteatosis was consistently linked to poor outcomes. However, this study was one of the first to focus on the prognostic significance of myosteatosis, specifically in localized RCC, highlighting the need for further studies in this area.

In our cohort, a relatively higher prevalence of myosteatosis was observed among female patients. This finding aligns with previous studies that highlight a stronger correlation between obesity and RCC risk in women compared to men. For instance, the Me-Can study indicated that high BMI significantly increased RCC risk in women more than in men, suggesting that metabolic factors related to obesity may contribute to this sex-specific difference in myosteatosis prevalence [16].

Multiple interrelated mechanisms support the association between myosteatosis and poor cancer outcomes. Myosteatosis is characterized by fat infiltration into skeletal muscles and leads to metabolic dysregulation, including insulin resistance, increased systemic inflammation, and oxidative stress, as noted by Miljkovic and Zmuda [17] and Miljkovic et al. [18]. This environment promotes cancer progression and weakens the immune response, thereby contributing to cancer cachexia and worsening survival outcomes. Additionally, Sueda et al. [15] emphasized that the skeletal muscle acts as an endocrine organ, releasing cytokines that maintain homeostasis. However, tumor-driven proinflammatory cytokines such as interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha disrupt this balance, leading to muscle degradation and exacerbating cancer-related muscle loss. Tan et al. [19] observed that in localized RCC, higher visceral adiposity correlated with larger tumor sizes, suggesting a potential link between body composition and disease aggression. Similarly, Rysz et al. [20] proposed that metabolic factors like insulin resistance may foster a tumor promoting environment through chronic inflammation, contributing to adverse pathological features such as tumor necrosis and lymphovascular invasion. Collectively, these mechanisms demonstrate that systemic inflammation and metabolic disturbances caused by myosteatosis are key drivers of poor oncologic outcomes in patients with cancer, further underscoring the need for preoperative assessment of body composition to improve the prognosis and treatment strategies for RCC.

This study highlights the potential of preoperative CT-based AI analysis to improve risk stratification in patients with RCC. Although previous research has largely focused on BMI, sarcopenia, and visceral fat [21], few studies have explored muscle quality using AI-driven CT analysis. By assessing myosteatosis, which is a predictor of poor outcomes, we offer a precise tool for identifying high-risk patients who may benefit from aggressive treatment or frequent follow-up.

Recent studies have demonstrated the usefulness of AI-based body composition analysis in improving cancer prognosis. For instance, Borrelli et al. [22] employed AI-powered CT software to standardize body composition assessments in patients with urothelial tumors, correlating sarcopenia with patient outcomes. Similarly, Xu et al. [23] demonstrated that AI algorithms applied to CT scans enhanced the risk prediction for lung cancer mortality and all-cause mortality by incorporating muscle quality metrics such as skeletal muscle attenuation. These studies underscore the growing importance of AI-driven assessments in the refinement of prognostic models. Our study applied this approach to RCC, demonstrating the utility of AI-driven analysis of muscle quality in improving prognosis alongside traditional clinical factors. By identifying patients with myosteatosis, treatment plans can be refined, and monitoring enhanced. Consistent with the findings of Westenberg et al. [8], our use of AI-based analysis provided improved accuracy, efficiency, and reproducibility over manual methods, thereby reducing observer bias and saving time.

Although our study did not focus on lifestyle interventions, findings from the ReLife study by Maurits et al. [24] suggest that managing lifestyle factors including diet and physical activity may improve outcomes for patients with poor muscle quality. The AI-driven muscle quality assessment used in our study could help identify patients who might benefit from such strategies, offering a pathway for improved oncologic outcomes through personalized care.

The retrospective design of this study and the use of single center data may have introduced a selection bias, limiting the generalizability of the results. Additionally, the follow up period may not have fully captured the long-term impact of myosteatosis in patients with RCC. To address these limitations, future multicenter prospective studies with prolonged follow-up periods and diverse patient populations are needed to validate our findings and further explore the biological mechanisms linking myosteatosis to poor outcomes, particularly in terms of metabolic dysregulation and fat infiltration in the muscle tissue.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that myosteatosis, assessed using AI-driven CT analysis, is associated with adverse pathological features in localized RCC, including lymphovascular invasion and tumor necrosis. Additionally, myosteatosis was independently associated with reduced DFS. AI-based body composition analysis of myosteatosis is a reliable method for improving risk stratification and identifying high-risk patients. Future multicenter studies with extended follow-up periods are required to validate these findings and further explore the underlying mechanisms.

Notes

Grant/Fund Support

This study received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Research Ethics

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Pusan National University Hospital, which ensured that all research protocols were conducted in accordance with ethical standards (IRB No. 2409-002-142).

Conflicts of Interest

Sihwan Kim is an employee of the ClariPi. This affiliation did not influence the research presented in this paper. Other remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Author Contribution

Conceptualization: BJK, HKH; Data curation: BJK, KHK; Formal analysis: BJK; Funding acquisition: BJK; Methodology: SBH, NKL, Suk K, Sihwan K; Project administration: BJK, HKH; Visualization: BJK, KHK, SK; Writing - original draft: BJK; Writing - review & editing: BJK, HKH.

References

1. Ljungberg B, Albiges L, Abu-Ghanem Y, Bensalah K, Dabestani S, Fernández-Pello S, et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: the 2019 update. Eur Urol 2019;75:799–810.
2. Kim DW, Ahn H, Kim KW, Lee SS, Kim HJ, Ko Y, et al. Prognostic value of sarcopenia and myosteatosis in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Korean J Radiol 2022;23:1055–66.
3. Addison O, Marcus RL, Lastayo PC, Ryan AS. Intermuscular fat: a review of the consequences and causes. Int J Endocrinol 2014;2014:309570.
4. Zhuang CL, Shen X, Huang YY, Zhang FM, Chen XY, Ma LL, et al. Myosteatosis predicts prognosis after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis from a large-scale cohort. Surgery 2019;166:297–304.
5. Daly LE, Power DG, O’Reilly A, Donnellan P, Cushen SJ, O’Sullivan K, et al. The impact of body composition parameters on ipilimumab toxicity and survival in patients with metastatic melanoma. Br J Cancer 2017;116:310–7.
6. CalixtoLima L, Wiegert EVM, de Oliveira LC, Chaves GV, Avesani CM, Bezerra FF. Factors associated with variability in skeletal muscle radiodensity in patients with metastatic cancer. Nutrition 2024;120:112351.
7. Kim DW, Kim KW, Ko Y, Park T, Khang S, Jeong H, et al. Assessment of myosteatosis on computed tomography by automatic generation of a muscle quality map using a web-based toolkit: feasibility study. JMIR Med Inform 2020;8:e23049.
8. Westenberg LB, Zorgdrager M, Swaab TDA, van Londen M, Bakker SJL, Leuvenink HGD, et al. Reference values for low muscle mass and myosteatosis using tomographic muscle measurements in living kidney donors. Sci Rep 2023;13:5835.
9. Haam JH, Kim BT, Kim EM, Kwon H, Kang JH, Park JH, et al. Diagnosis of obesity: 2022 update of clinical practice guidelines for obesity by the Korean Society for the study of obesity. J Obes Metab Syndr 2023;32:121–9.
10. Amini B, Boyle SP, Boutin RD, Lenchik L. Approaches to assessment of muscle mass and myosteatosis on computed tomography: a systematic review. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2019;74:1671–8.
11. Ebadi M, Tsien C, Bhanji RA, Dunichand-Hoedl AR, Rider E, Motamedrad M, et al. Myosteatosis in cirrhosis: a review of diagnosis, pathophysiological mechanisms and potential interventions. Cells 2022;11:1216.
12. Kim HK, Kim KW, Kim EH, Lee MJ, Bae SJ, Ko Y, et al. Age-related changes in muscle quality and development of diagnostic cutoff points for myosteatosis in lumbar skeletal muscles measured by CT scan. Clin Nutr 2021;40:4022–8.
13. Chang TW, Cheng WM, Fan YH, Lin CC, Lin TP, YiHsiu Huang E, et al. Predictive factors for disease recurrence in patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with curative surgery. J Chin Med Assoc 2021;84:405–9.
14. Mouracade P, Kara O, Maurice MJ, Dagenais J, Malkoc E, Nelson RJ, et al. Patterns and predictors of recurrence after partial nephrectomy for kidney tumors. J Urol 2017;197:1403–9.
15. Sueda T, Takahasi H, Nishimura J, Hata T, Matsuda C, Mizushima T, et al. Impact of low muscularity and myosteatosis on long-term outcome after curative colorectal cancer surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 2018;61:364–74.
16. Haggstrom C, Rapp K, Stocks T, Manjer J, Bjorge T, Ulmer H, et al. Metabolic factors associated with risk of renal cell carcinoma. PLoS One 2013;8:e57475.
17. Miljkovic I, Zmuda JM. Epidemiology of myosteatosis. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2010;13:260–4.
18. Miljkovic I, Vella CA, Allison M. Computed tomography derived myosteatosis and metabolic disorders. Diabetes Metab J 2021;45:482–91.
19. Tan CC, Sheng TW, Chang YH, Wang LJ, Chuang CK, Wu CT, et al. Utilizing computed tomography to analyze the morphomic change between patients with localized and metastatic renal cell carcinoma: body composition varies according to cancer stage. J Clin Med 2022;11:4444.
20. Rysz J, Franczyk B, Ławiński J, Olszewski R, GlubaBrzózka A. The role of metabolic factors in renal cancers. Int J Mol Sci 2020;21:7246.
21. Yoo HJ, Kim SI, Kim SJ, Won I, Cho DS. The prognostic significance of body mass index in patients undergoing nephrectomy for nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma. Korean J Urol Oncol 2023;21:88–94.
22. Borrelli A, Pecoraro M, Del Giudice F, Cristofani L, Messina E, Dehghanpour A, et al. Standardization of body composition status in patients with advanced urothelial tumors: the role of a CT-based AI-powered software for the assessment of sarcopenia and patient outcome correlation. Cancers (Basel) 2023;15:2968.
23. Xu K, Khan MS, Li TZ, Gao R, Terry JG, Huo Y, et al. AI body composition in lung cancer screening: added value beyond lung cancer detection. Radiology 2023;308:e222937.
24. Maurits JSF, Sedelaar JPM, Aben KKH, Kampman E, ReLife study group, Kiemeney LALM, et al. Cohort profile - the renal cell cancer: lifestyle, prognosis and quality of life (ReLife) study in the Netherlands. BMJ Open 2023;13:e066909.

Article information Continued

Fig. 1.

Schematics for abdomen muscle analysis algorithm in ClariSarco. The abdominal computed tomography (CT) image is used for both finding the location of third lumbar spine (L3) level and segmentation of the abdominal muscular regions. For the L3-level localization (green rectangular box), the CT image is projected to anterior-posterior direction using maximum intensity projection (MIP) method, and the MIP image is input to the convolutional neural network (CNN)-based detection module. Simultaneously, the CT image is segmented by UNet-based CNN-module generating abdominal muscular region mask. Intermuscular adipose tissue area (IMATA), low attenuation muscle area (LAMA) and normal attenuation area (NAMA) were defined within the muxcular region based on CT-density (Hounsfield unit). All the information was used for calculating the skeletal muscle index and myosteatosis percentage defined as (LAMA+NAMA)/height2 and (1-NAMA/TAMA) ×100, respectively. AI, artificial intelligence; SMA, skeletal muscle area.

Fig. 2.

Abdominal muscle segmentation and tissue attenuation analysis. This figure illustrates abdominal muscle segmentation at the L3 vertebral level using computed tomography (CT) imaging. The tissue attenuation histogram shows the distribution of muscle density, with the areas categorized into intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT), low attenuation muscle area (LAMA), and normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA). HU, Hounsfield unit; BMI, body mass index; SMI, skeletal muscle index.

Fig. 3.

Representative computed tomography (CT) analysis of myosteatosis and no myosteatosis groups. Comparison of myosteatosis (bottom) and no myosteatosis (top) groups. The myosteatosis case shows a reduced normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA) proportion within the total abdominal muscle area (TAMA), indicating greater fat infiltration in muscle tissue. SMA, skeletal muscle area; HU, Hounsfield unit; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, intermuscular adipose tissue.

Fig. 4.

Kaplan-Meier analysis of disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with and without myosteatosis. Kaplan-Meier curves showing DFS for patients with myosteatosis (red line) and those without myosteatosis (blue line). A statistically significant difference in DFS was observed between the 2 groups (log-rank p<0.05).

Table 1.

Preoperative patients’ characteristics

Variable Myosteatosis No myosteatosis p-value
No. of patients 36 (21.2) 134 (78.8)
Sex <0.05
 Male 14 (38.9) 103 (76.9)
 Female 22 (61.1) 31 (23.1)
Age (yr) 64.2±10.1 57.5±12.1 <0.05
Hypertension 20 (55.6) 53 (39.6) 0.125
Diabetes mellitus 11 (30.6) 24 (17.9) 0.152
BMI (kg/m2) <0.05
 Normal (<23) 6 (16.7) 54 (40.3)
 Overweight (≥23 and <25) 7 (19.4) 34 (25.4)
 Obese (≥25) 23 (63.9) 46 (34.3)
 Overweight or obese (≥23) 30 (83.3) 80 (59.7) <0.05
NLR≥3.4 5 (13.9) 13 (9.7) 0.176
GFR (MDRD) GFR (mL/min/1.73 m2) 91.6±26.0 85.2±38.6 0.346
Hb (g/dL) 12.8±1.7 14.1±1.6 <0.05
PLT (103/µL) 267.1±68.1 242.0±67.4 0.054

Values are presented as number (%) or mean±standard deviation.

BMI, body mass index; NLR, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; MDRD, modification of diet in renal disease; Hb, hemoglobin; PLT, platelet count.

GFR (MDRD) formula: 175 × (serum creatinine)-1.154×(age)-0.203×(0.742 if female).

Table 2.

Comparison of pathological characteristics between patients with and without myosteatosis after surgery

Variable Myosteatosis No myosteatosis p-value
No, of patients 36 (21.2) 134 (78.8)
pTstage 0.286
 T1 and T2 34 (94.4) 131 (97.8)
 T3 and T4 2 (5.6) 3 (2.2)
Histologic type 0.526
 Clear cell 30 (83.3) 102 (76.1)
 Papillary 5 (13.9) 18 (13.4)
 Chromophobe 1 (2.8) 10 (7.5)
 Others 0 (0) 4 (3.0)
Grade 0.824
 G1 and G2 27 (75.0) 104 (77.6)
 G3 and G4 9 (25.0) 30 (22.4)
Invasion
 Renal capsule 7 (19.4) 28 (20.9) 0.848
 Perirenal fat 1 (2.8) 1 (0.7) 0.316
 Lymphovascular 8 (22.2) 12 (9) <0.05
 Sinus fat 1 (2.8) 2 (1.5) 0.603
Tumor necrosis 10 (27.8) 7 (5.2) <0.05
Margin positivity 1 (2.8) 7 (5.2) 0.538

Values are presented as number (%).

Table 3.

Comparison of pathological characteristics between clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients with and without myosteatosis after surgery

Variable Myosteatosis No myosteatosis p-value
No, of patients 30 (22.7) 102 (77.3)
pTstage 0.286
 T1 and T2 29 (96.7) 101 (99.0)
 T3 and T4 1 (3.3) 1 (1.0)
Grade 0.824
 G1 and G2 25 (83.3) 84 (82.4)
 G3 and G4 5 (16.7) 18 (17.6)
Invasion
 Renal capsule 7 (23.3) 18 (17.6) 0.848
 Perirenal fat 1 (3.3) 1 (1.0) 0.316
 Lymphovascular 8 (26.7) 8 (7.8) <0.05
 Sinus fat 1 (3.3) 0 (0) 0.603
Tumor necrosis 9 (30.0) 6 (5.9) <0.05
Margin positivity 1 (3.3) 7 (6.9) 0.538

Values are presented as number (%).

Table 4.

Univariate and multivariate analysis of disease-free survival in patients with renal cell carcinoma

Variable Univariate
Multivariate
p-value Hazards ratio (95% CI) p-value
Sex, female vs. male 0.181
Age (yr) 0.035* 1.10 (1.02–1.18) 0.362
Hypertension 0.343
Diabetes mellitus 0.291
BMI, normal vs. overweight or obese 0.222
Myosteatosis 0.048* 1.50 (1.18–1.91) 0.040*
NLR, 3.4 or higher 0.231
pTstage, pT1 vs. pT2–4 0.143
Grade 3 or higher 0.143
Renal capsule invasion 0.162
Perirenal fat invasion 0.706
Lymphovascular invasion 0.149
Sinus fat invasion 0.014* 1.63 (0.57–4.57) 0.024*
Tumor necrosis 0.752
Margin positivity <0.001* 3.25 (1.14–8.12) <0.001*

BMI, body mass index; NLR, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio; CI, confidence Interval.

*

p<0.05, statistically significant differences.