Catherine Kubrak1, Lisa Martin2, Leah Gramlich3, Rufus Scrimger4, Naresh Jha4, Brock Debenham4, Neil Chua5, John Walker5, Vickie E Baracos6. 1. Department of Oncology, Division of Palliative Care Medicine, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, 11560 University Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1Z2, Canada. 2. Faculty of Agricultural, Life and Environmental Sciences, Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, Cross Cancer Institute, 11560 University Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1Z2, Canada. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, University of Alberta, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T5H 3V9, Canada. 4. Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, 11560 University Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1Z2, Canada. 5. Department Oncology, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, 11560 University Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1Z2, Canada. 6. Department of Oncology, Division of Palliative Care Medicine, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, 11560 University Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1Z2, Canada. Electronic address: vbaracos@ualberta.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Head and neck cancer (HNC) are at high nutritional risk; however the prevalence and severity of malnutrition in contemporary patients with HNC are unclear. Diagnostic criteria for cancer-associated weight loss grading (WLG) (Grades 0 to 4) [1] have been validated and are recommended in oncology nutrition clinical practice guidelines [2-3]. The aim was to determine the prevalence using WLG in HNC patients and determine the extent to which reduced dietary intake (DI) explained variation of WLG. METHODS: A population-based cohort of HNC patients (N = 1756) in northern Alberta, Canada included consecutive new patients, 2004-2016. At referral to the regional cancer center weight history and DI categories were collected. Multinomial logistic regression (MLR) identified predictors of weight loss (WL) severity. Overall survival (OS) in relation to WL Grade and DI was determined by multivariable Cox proportional hazard. RESULTS: WL was absent in 42.9% and the remainder had Grade 1 (18%), Grade 2 (14.7%), Grade 3 (15.9%) and Grade 4 (8.5%) WL. Independent predictors of WLG in adjusted MLR model, included stage (P < 0.000), performance status (PS) (P < 0.000) and DI categories (P < 0.000); sex, age and disease site were not significant. Compared to "normal food in normal amount" adjusted Odds Ratio for WL Grade 4 was 4.0 (2.1-7.5) "normal food, but less than normal amount"; 25.2 (10.7-59.1) "little solid food"; 51.8 (10.5-255.3) "very little of anything"; 42.4 (11.0-163.0) "only liquids"; 25.9 (7.1-94.3) "only nutritional supplements". In the Cox model controlled for age, sex, cancer stage and site and PS, both WLG ((P < 0.000) and DI categories (P = 0.003) independently predicted OS. CONCLUSION: Data from this population cohort provide a benchmark for prevalence of cancer associated WL severity at diagnosis. Patient reported DI categories are strong predictors of WL and prognostic for OS.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Head and neck cancer (HNC) are at high nutritional risk; however the prevalence and severity of malnutrition in contemporary patients with HNC are unclear. Diagnostic criteria for cancer-associated weight loss grading (WLG) (Grades 0 to 4) [1] have been validated and are recommended in oncology nutrition clinical practice guidelines [2-3]. The aim was to determine the prevalence using WLG in HNC patients and determine the extent to which reduced dietary intake (DI) explained variation of WLG. METHODS: A population-based cohort of HNC patients (N = 1756) in northern Alberta, Canada included consecutive new patients, 2004-2016. At referral to the regional cancer center weight history and DI categories were collected. Multinomial logistic regression (MLR) identified predictors of weight loss (WL) severity. Overall survival (OS) in relation to WL Grade and DI was determined by multivariable Cox proportional hazard. RESULTS: WL was absent in 42.9% and the remainder had Grade 1 (18%), Grade 2 (14.7%), Grade 3 (15.9%) and Grade 4 (8.5%) WL. Independent predictors of WLG in adjusted MLR model, included stage (P < 0.000), performance status (PS) (P < 0.000) and DI categories (P < 0.000); sex, age and disease site were not significant. Compared to "normal food in normal amount" adjusted Odds Ratio for WL Grade 4 was 4.0 (2.1-7.5) "normal food, but less than normal amount"; 25.2 (10.7-59.1) "little solid food"; 51.8 (10.5-255.3) "very little of anything"; 42.4 (11.0-163.0) "only liquids"; 25.9 (7.1-94.3) "only nutritional supplements". In the Cox model controlled for age, sex, cancer stage and site and PS, both WLG ((P < 0.000) and DI categories (P = 0.003) independently predicted OS. CONCLUSION: Data from this population cohort provide a benchmark for prevalence of cancer associated WL severity at diagnosis. Patient reported DI categories are strong predictors of WL and prognostic for OS.
Authors: Merran Findlay; Judith D Bauer; Rupinder Dhaliwal; Marian de van der Schueren; Alessandro Laviano; Adrianne Widaman; Lisa Martin; Andrew G Day; Leah M Gramlich Journal: Nutrients Date: 2020-12-11 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Nuwan Dharmawardana; Thomas Goddard; Charmaine Woods; David I Watson; Ross Butler; Eng H Ooi; Roger Yazbeck Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-09-14 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Marianne Boll Kristensen; Irene Wessel; Kim Skov Ustrup; Karin B Dieperink; Ann-Dorthe Zwisler; Anne Marie Beck Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 2.692