Publication:
Comparison of phase angle and various anthropometric parameters in patients diagnosed with and without cancer

dc.contributor.coauthorAytulu, T.
dc.contributor.departmentSchool of Medicine
dc.contributor.kuauthorMandel, Nil Molinas
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteSCHOOL OF MEDICINE
dc.date.accessioned2026-08-14T11:21:16Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.description.abstractThis study aimed to compare the phase angle (PhA) and other anthropometric values in patients with and without a cancer diagnosis. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study in Istanbul, Turkey, included 82 patients in a hospital’s Nutrition and Dietetics Outpatient Clinic in 2023. The participants were divided into cancer and control groups. Anthropometric measurements included weight (kg), height (cm), and various body composition parameters such as body mass index (BMI) (kg/m 2 ), skeletal muscle mass (SMM), skeletal muscle mass index (SMMI), fat mass (FM) (kg), fat‐free mass (FFM) (kg), muscle mass (MM) (kg), and total body water (TBW) (kg). Results: Statistically significant difference was found in BMI ( t = −3.293; p < 0.01), FFM ( U = 502.5; p < 0.01), MM ( U = 480; p < 0.001), FM ( U = 573; p < 0.05), and TBW ( U = 550; p < 0.01) between the groups. Also, a significant difference was found in PhA ( t = −3.689; p < 0.001), SMM ( U = 502.5; p < 0.01), and SMMI ( t = −3.189; p < 0.01). The study revealed significant differences in FFM, MM, and TBW values based on PhA groups among patients with and without a cancer diagnosis. For cancer patients, high PhA values correlated with significantly higher mean FFM, MM, and TBW values than those with low PhA values ( p < 0.05). Additionally, age was associated with decreased PhA, and SMMI was linked to increased PhA among patients with cancer ( p < 0.01; p < 0.001, respectively). Conclusion: Our study found that certain measurements were significantly lower in cancer patients than those without cancer. These findings suggest that BIA can benefit all cancer patients, and conducting future studies on this topic will help enhance patient treatment and follow‐up.
dc.description.harvestedfromManual
dc.description.indexedbyWOS
dc.description.indexedbyScopus
dc.description.publisherscopeInternational
dc.description.readpublishN/A
dc.description.sponsoredbyTubitakEuN/A
dc.description.versionPublished Version
dc.identifier.ScopusPercentile55
dc.identifier.ScopusQuartileQ2
dc.identifier.WoSPercentile27,6
dc.identifier.WoSQuartileQ3
dc.identifier.doi10.1155/ecc/4816061
dc.identifier.eissn1365-2354
dc.identifier.embargoN/A
dc.identifier.issn0961-5423
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105003739041
dc.identifier.urihttp://doi.org/10.1155/ecc/4816061
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/34357
dc.identifier.volume2025
dc.identifier.wos001473063100001
dc.keywordsAnthropometric parameters
dc.keywordsBioelectrical impedance
dc.keywordsCancer
dc.keywordsNutritional status
dc.keywordsPhase angle
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherWiley
dc.relation.affiliationKoç University
dc.relation.collectionKoç University Institutional Repository
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of Cancer Care
dc.relation.openaccessN/A
dc.rightsN/A
dc.rights.uriN/A
dc.subjectOncology
dc.subjectHealth care sciences and services
dc.subjectNursing
dc.subjectRehabilitation
dc.titleComparison of phase angle and various anthropometric parameters in patients diagnosed with and without cancer
dc.typeJournal Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationd02929e1-2a70-44f0-ae17-7819f587bedd
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryd02929e1-2a70-44f0-ae17-7819f587bedd
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication17f2dc8e-6e54-4fa8-b5e0-d6415123a93e
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery17f2dc8e-6e54-4fa8-b5e0-d6415123a93e

Files