Bioimpedentiometry parameters used as indicators of frailty and malnutrition: association between G8 score and Phase angle (PHA) in elderly cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Since the incidence of cancer increases with age, in older cancer patients important information may be missed without a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). On the other side, CGA is a time-consuming and complex instrument, so that Geriatric 8 (G8) has been proposed as a more feasible screening tool to identify patients who could benefit from a CGA evaluation. G8 consists of 8 questions (patient age + 7 items derived from the Mini Nutritional Assessment questionnaire). A G8 score ≤ 14 is considered associated with frailty and risk of malnutrition. Another screening test is Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (Bioimpedentiometry, BIA), which enables to evaluate the nutritional status through a specific parameter known as Phase angle (PhA). This study is aimed at assessing the ability of G8 alone or in combination with PhA to detect elderly cancer patients at higher risk for malnutrition who cannot undergo immediate anticancer treatments. METHODS: A total of 289 cancer patients (168 men and 121 women) aged ≥ 70 years old were enrolled and performed both G8 test, body mass index (BMI) and BIA assessments. A concurrent G8 score ≤ 14 and PhA < 5 defined subjects most exposed to the risk of malnutrition. RESULTS: An association between BMI and G8 (p < 0.001, OR 1.54) and a clinically significant relationship between G8 and PhA (p = 0.013) were observed. CONCLUSION: G8 can be used to identify patients at risk for malnutrition who would benefit from comprehensive CGA. The concurrent use of G8 and BIA presents a higher power in discriminating subjects at higher risk of malnutrition than a single test. This study suggests the need for routine assessment of nutritional status in cancer patients using combinations of methods, in order to implement strategies for individually-tailored care before starting any treatment.

Antiemetic efficacy of single-dose palonosetron and dexamethasone in patients receiving multiple cycles of multiple day-based chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of pharmacological prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) should be the elimination of both nausea and vomiting symptoms during all planned chemotherapy cycles. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of a single dose of palonosetron and dexamethasone to prevent CINV and to guarantee an adequate food intake (FI) in patients receiving several cycles of multiple day-based chemotherapy (MD-CT). METHODS: Patients with advanced cancer but without a compromised nutritional status (bone mass index ≥ 18.5) were treated with 0.25 mg palonosetron plus 20 mg dexamethasone before MD-CT. The MD-CT regimen was either epirubicin plus ifosfamide or paclitaxel plus cisplatin and ifosfamide. Nausea, vomiting, and FI were monitored in a 7-day diary. Complete response (CR: no vomiting and no rescue therapy) was the primary endpoint, while complete control (CC: CR and no more than mild nausea) and the evaluation of FI were secondary endpoints. The endpoints were evaluated during the overall timescale (0-168 h) of the chemotherapy regimen. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled, 80% of whom achieved CR and 78% achieved CC. During the six chemotherapy cycles, CR and CC ranged from 76% to 88% and from 62% to 88%, respectively. Moreover, patients with CR had a significantly (p < 0.0001) higher weekly food intake compared with patients not achieving CR. CONCLUSIONS: This trial was the first to assess the efficacy of palonosetron and dexamethasone for the prevention of both nausea and vomiting in patients receiving multiple cycles of MD-CT. In this trial, the ability of patients to intake an adequate amount of food each week was correlated with nausea, thus providing clinicians with an objective parameter for the measurement of the effects of nausea. A single dose of palonosetron and dexamethasone was able to prevent CINV in most patients receiving 3 days of chemotherapy during all planned chemotherapy cycles.

Prevalence of malnutrition in patients at first medical oncology visit: the PreMiO study.

BACKGROUND: In cancer patients, malnutrition is associated with treatment toxicity, complications, reduced physical functioning, and decreased survival. The Prevalence of Malnutrition in Oncology (PreMiO) study identified malnutrition or its risk among cancer patients making their first medical oncology visit. Innovatively, oncologists, not nutritionists, evaluated the nutritional status of the patients in this study. METHODS: PreMiO was a prospective, observational study conducted at 22 medical oncology centers across Italy. For inclusion, adult patients (>18 years) had a solid tumor diagnosis, were treatment-naive, and had a life expectancy >3 months. Malnutrition was identified by the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), appetite status with a visual analog scale (VAS), and appetite loss with a modified version of Anorexia-Cachexia Subscale (AC/S-12) of the Functional Assessment of Anorexia-Cachexia Therapy (FAACT). FINDINGS: Of patients enrolled (N=1,952), 51% had nutritional impairment; 9% were overtly malnourished, and 43% were at risk for malnutrition. Severity of malnutrition was positively correlated with the stage of cancer. Over 40% of patients were experiencing anorexia, as reported in the VAS and FAACT questionnaire. During the prior six months, 64% of patients lost weight (1-10 kg). INTERPRETATION: Malnutrition, anorexia, and weight loss are common in cancer patients, even at their first visit to a medical oncology center.

Systemic treatment of gastrointestinal cancer in elderly patients.

PURPOSE: Gastrointestinal cancer (GI) incidence increases with each decade of life and is the leading cause of death in patients aged >70 years. Nevertheless, elderly patients are often excluded or underrepresented in clinical trials. We performed a review of current recommendations in the management of GI elderly cancer patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was performed analyzing data about several meta-analysis and studies regarding chemotherapeutic regimens in elderly patients with colorectal and gastroesophageal cancers. RESULTS: Most of the studies demonstrated that the elderly experience the same advantages and toxicities from chemotherapy as younger individuals despite the fact that the data reviewed in this article provide evidence that elderly with GI cancers are underrepresented in clinical trials and few trials are conducted addressing the different risks and aims in older population. Each individual should be assessed for an appropriate regimen of treatment in the adjuvant or metastatic gastrointestinal cancer setting, and the decision of how to treat elderly must incorporate goals and preferences of the patient after a careful discussion of risks and benefits. CONCLUSION: Chronological age alone is not a sufficient factor to withhold curative/palliative treatment from an elderly GI cancer patient, and cofactors regarding their functional, social, and mental status have to be considered. For this purpose, several tools exist that may be utilized, such as geriatric assessment scores, comorbidity indices, frailty indices, scores for predicting toxicity from chemotherapy, and prognostic indices for survival.