| Literature DB >> 25293388 |
Lies Pottel, Michelle Lycke, Tom Boterberg, Hans Pottel, Laurence Goethals, Fréderic Duprez, Alex Maes, Stefan Goemaere, Sylvie Rottey, Imogen Foubert, Philip R Debruyne1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Therapy-induced mucositis and dysphagia puts head and neck (H&N) cancer patients at increased risk for developing cachexia. Omega-3 fatty acids (n-3 FA) have been suggested to protect against cachexia. We aimed to examine if echium oil, a plant source of n-3 FA, could reduce weight loss in H&N cancer patients undergoing radio(chemo)therapy with curative intent.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25293388 PMCID: PMC4200132 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6882-14-382
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Fatty acid composition of dietary supplements
| % Total fatty acid composition Name | BioMega SDA® (I group) mean ± SD | Sunflower oil high oleic (C group) mean ± SD |
|---|---|---|
| C16:0 Palmitic acid (P) | 7.28 ± 0.17 | 4.00 ± 0.00 |
| C18:0 Stearic acid (S) | 3.90 ± 0.08 | 2.88 ± 0.05 |
| C18:1 ( | 15.35 ± 0.24 | 84.48 ± 0.05 |
| C18:2 ( | 16.13 ± 0.10 | 8.40 ± 0.00 |
| C18:3 ( | 31.38 ± 0.25 | - |
| C18:3 ( | 11.00 ± 0.00 | - |
| C18:4 ( | 12.60 ± 0.22 | - |
| C22:1 ( | - | - |
| Trans fatty acids | - | - |
Abbreviations: I Intervention, C Control.
Demographic and clinical characteristics*
| Intervention group (I) N = 43 | Control group (C) N = 42 | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| Age | 61.0 (30 – 81) | 60.5 (35–79) |
|
|
| |
| Male | 36 (83.7) | 35 (83.3) |
| Female | 7 (16.3) | 7 (16.7) |
| ECOG PS ≤1 | 34 (79.1) | 38 (90.5) |
|
| ||
| Married/living together | 31 (72.1) | 34 (81.0) |
|
| ||
| Labourer | 18 (41.9) | 17 (40.5) |
| Employee | 20 (46.5) | 19 (45.2) |
| Self-employed | 5 (11.6) | 5 (11.9) |
|
| ||
| Alcohol consumption (U/day) | 4.0 (1.0, 8.0) | 3.0 (1.0, 6.3) |
| Tobacco consumption (PY) | 25.5 (8.6, 40.3) | 35.0 (17.8, 50.0) |
|
|
| |
|
| ||
| Oral cavity | 11 (25.6) | 7 (16.7) |
| Oropharynx | 17 (39.5) | 17 (40.5) |
| Hypopharynx | 7 (16.3) | 4 (9.5) |
| Nasopharynx | 2 (4.7) | 2 (4.8) |
| Supraglottis | 2 (4.7) | 7 (16.7) |
| Glottis | 2 (4.7) | 2 (4.8) |
| Occult primary | 2 (4.7) | 3 (7.1) |
|
| ||
| Early stage (I-II) | 6 (14.0) | 8 (19.0) |
| Late stage (III-IVb) | 37 (86.0) | 34 (81.0) |
|
| ||
|
| 2 (4.7) | 4 (9.5) |
|
| ||
| Alone | 7 (16.3) | 8 (19.0) |
| With chemotherapy | 22 (51.2) | 18 (42.9) |
| With biotherapy | 0 (0.0) | 2 (4.8) |
|
| ||
| Alone | 5 (11.6) | 3 (7.1) |
| With chemotherapy | 7 (16.3) | 7 (16.7) |
| With biotherapy | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
|
|
| |
| 6-months weight loss (%) | 2.5 (6.8, −1.5) | 2.2 (5.4, 2.4) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.80 (20.50, 28.70) | 24.25 (21.8, 27.2) |
| PG-SGA score | 10.0 (5.0, 15.0) | 8.5 (6.8, 13.0) |
| Caloric intake (kcal/day) | 1784 (1449, 2284) | 1759 (1531, 2198) |
*Both groups did not significantly differ in demographic, nor clinical, nor nutritional characteristics at P < 0.05.
Figure 1Patient allocation flow diagram.
Adherence to dietary supplements
| Supplement intake (%) | I group n = 43; n (%) | C group n = 42; n (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 100% | 8 (18.6) | 10 (23.8) |
| ≥ 75% - < 100% | 17 (39.5) | 16 (38.1) |
| ≥ 50% - < 75% | 6 (14.0) | 4 (9.5) |
| ≥ 25% - < 50% | 2 (4.7) | 3 (7.1) |
| < 25% | 10 (23.3) | 9 (21.4) |
Abbreviations: I intervention, C control.
Nutritional supplement-related erythrocyte fatty acid profile changes (expressed as% total fatty acid composition; n = 79)*
| Fatty acids | W0 | W4 | % change | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | C | p | I | C | p | I | C | p | |
|
| |||||||||
|
| 0.14 (0.11, 0.20)c | 0.13 (0.12, 0.18)b | NS | 0.17 (0.14, 0.23)c | 0.12 (0.09, 0.15)b |
| 25.40 (−4.50, 63.60) | −16.70 (−33.30, 0.00) |
|
|
| 0.66 (0.47, 0.81)c | 0.68 (0.57, 0.88) | NS | 0.75 (0.66, 0.90)c | 0.62 (0.50, 0.82) |
| 14.40 (−2.78, 37.78) | −5.30 (−21.80, 8.80) |
|
|
| |||||||||
|
| 6.72 (5.94, 7.49)d | 6.71 (5.88, 7.44)a | NS | 6.03 (5.25, 6.81)d | 6.68 (5.71, 7.16)a | NS | −8.35 (−15.38, −2.48) | −3.80 (−9.60, 3.50) |
|
|
| 0.04 (0.02, 0.05)b | 0.05 (0.03, 0.06)a | NS | 0.06 (0.04, 0.07)b | 0.03 (0.02, 0.06)a |
| 41.65 (−20.00, 133.3) | −20.00 (−50.00, 16.70) |
|
|
| 1.21 (1.13, 1.42)d | 1.34 (1.21, 1.65) |
| 1.52 (1.22, 1.78)d | 1.36 (1.14, 1.68) | NS | 18.75 (1.75, 35.30) | 2.40 (−6.20, 6.80) |
|
|
| 12.84 (11.39, 13.35) | 12.80 (11.72, 13.50) | NS | 12.78 (11.77, 13.37) | 12.71 (11.71, 13.64) | NS | 2.35 (−2.05, 7.13) | −0.80 (−5.30, 5.00) | NS |
*Data presented as median (Q1, Q3). Within-group significant differences were indicated by letters a (p < 0.05), b (p < 0.01), c (p < 0.001), d (p < 0.0001). Five patients refused second blood analysis, one was admitted to ICU. Significant P-values provided in bold.
Figure 2Percent change in erythrocyte fatty acid profile after dietary supplement consumption. The I and C group values are presented as respectively red squares and blue diamonds, and the resp. full and dashed line. A. Percent change in EPA in I (r 0.50, P < 0.01) and C (r −0.17, P > 0.05), B. Percent change in DGLA in I (r 0.60, P < 0.0001) and C (r −0.24, P > 0.05), C. Percent change in ALA in I (r 0.43, P < 0.01) and C (r −0.19, P > 0.05), and D. Percent change in AA in I (r 0.16, P > 0.05) and C (r −0.28, P > 0.05). EPA: eicosapentaenoic acid, ALA: α-linolenic acid, DGLA: dihomo-γ-linolenic acid, AA: arachidonic acid.