BACKGROUND & AIMS: Different nutrition assessment tools and definitions are proposed for cancer-associated malnutrition and wasting (cachexia). We studied the associations between these assessments and overall survival in stage IV colorectal carcinoma patients. METHODS:Anthropometric measures, energy intake, biochemical variables, nutritional risk screening, assessment of malnutrition, cachexia and body composition from computed tomography images were analysed, in 77 patients from Norway and Canada. Results were dichotomized into presence or absence of nutritional risk, malnutrition, cachexia and sarcopenia (low muscle mass) and associated with survival. RESULTS: Overall, 22% up to 55% of the patients had cachexia according to different cachexia criteria: 34% were malnourished, 42% were at nutritional risk, and 39% were sarcopenic. Forty-four percent of the patients did not meet criteria for any of these conditions. Patients with cachexia defined by Cancer Cachexia Study Group (CCSG) had shorter survival in an unadjusted analysis, [Hazard ratio (HR) = 2.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-4.47; P = 0.005]. After adjusting for nation, age and gender, cachexia (HR = 2.26; CI 1.18-4.32; P = 0.014) and malnutrition (HR = 1.83; CI 1.06-3.13; P = 0.029) remained significant predictors of survival. CONCLUSIONS:Nutritional depletion in up to 55% of the patients was found. The lack of concordance between the results obtained by different assessment criteria was obvious. CCSG's cachexia score was the best prognostic factor for overall survival.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Different nutrition assessment tools and definitions are proposed for cancer-associated malnutrition and wasting (cachexia). We studied the associations between these assessments and overall survival in stage IV colorectal carcinomapatients. METHODS: Anthropometric measures, energy intake, biochemical variables, nutritional risk screening, assessment of malnutrition, cachexia and body composition from computed tomography images were analysed, in 77 patients from Norway and Canada. Results were dichotomized into presence or absence of nutritional risk, malnutrition, cachexia and sarcopenia (low muscle mass) and associated with survival. RESULTS: Overall, 22% up to 55% of the patients had cachexia according to different cachexia criteria: 34% were malnourished, 42% were at nutritional risk, and 39% were sarcopenic. Forty-four percent of the patients did not meet criteria for any of these conditions. Patients with cachexia defined by Cancer Cachexia Study Group (CCSG) had shorter survival in an unadjusted analysis, [Hazard ratio (HR) = 2.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-4.47; P = 0.005]. After adjusting for nation, age and gender, cachexia (HR = 2.26; CI 1.18-4.32; P = 0.014) and malnutrition (HR = 1.83; CI 1.06-3.13; P = 0.029) remained significant predictors of survival. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional depletion in up to 55% of the patients was found. The lack of concordance between the results obtained by different assessment criteria was obvious. CCSG's cachexia score was the best prognostic factor for overall survival.
Authors: James L Devin; Andrew T Sax; Gareth I Hughes; David G Jenkins; Joanne F Aitken; Suzanne K Chambers; Jeffrey C Dunn; Kate A Bolam; Tina L Skinner Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Livia Costa de Oliveira; Gabriela Travassos Abreu; Larissa Calixto Lima; Mariah Azevedo Aredes; Emanuelly Varea Maria Wiegert Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-02-07 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Joshua R Huot; Leah J Novinger; Fabrizio Pin; Ashok Narasimhan; Teresa A Zimmers; Thomas M O'Connell; Andrea Bonetto Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2020-05-07
Authors: Lindsay A Renfro; Fotios Loupakis; Richard A Adams; Matthew T Seymour; Volker Heinemann; Hans-Joachim Schmoll; Jean-Yves Douillard; Herbert Hurwitz; Charles S Fuchs; Eduardo Diaz-Rubio; Rainer Porschen; Christophe Tournigand; Benoist Chibaudel; Alfredo Falcone; Niall C Tebbutt; Cornelis J A Punt; J Randolph Hecht; Carsten Bokemeyer; Eric Van Cutsem; Richard M Goldberg; Leonard B Saltz; Aimery de Gramont; Daniel J Sargent; Heinz-Josef Lenz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-10-26 Impact factor: 44.544