Female cancer survivors are more likely to be at high risk of malnutrition and meet the threshold for clinical importance for a number of quality of life subscales.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to explore malnutrition risk, handgrip strength and quality of life (QOL) in cancer survivors. METHODS: In total, 232 individuals completed a demographic questionnaire, Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Handgrip strength was determined using a spring-loaded handgrip dynamometer and anthropometric measurements were taken by an oncology nurse. Frequencies and distribution data, analysis of variance and chi-squared tests were then conducted. RESULTS: The majority of the cohort were female (n = 141; 60.8%) had breast cancer (n = 62; 26.7%) and the mean ± SD body mass index (BMI) was 26.6 ± 6.2 kg m-2 . Less than a one-third reported seeing a dietitian (n = 68; 29.3%). Over one-third reported recent weight loss (n = 88; 37.3%). Some 40.9% (n = 95) were at moderate to high risk of malnutrition, with women more likely than men to be classified as high risk (p < 0.05). Mean ± SD handgrip strength was 25 ± 15 kg and this differed significantly by gender (p = 0.00), cancer type (p = 0.01) and BMI classification (p = 0.01). One-fifth of individuals were classified as having dynapenia (n = 48; 21.1%). Median (interquartile range) QOL score was 66.7 (33.3). The proportion of individuals meeting the threshold for clinical importance for QOL subscales ranged from 12.5% (constipation) to 42.7% (physical functioning). Females were more likely than males to meet the threshold for physical functioning (p = 0.00), fatigue (p = 0.02) and pain (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Females are more likely than males to be at high risk of malnutrition and meet the threshold for clinical significance for several QOL subscales.

A review of iPhone and Android apps for cancer patients and survivors: assessing their quality, nutrition information and behaviour change techniques.

BACKGROUND: The present study reviewed the quality, nutrition content and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) of apps aimed at those with cancer. METHODS: The Apple App Store and Androids' Google Play were searched in March 2020. Apps were scored for accountability as per Silberg's standards, quality as per the Mobile Application Rating Scale, and BCTs using the CALO-RE Taxonomy. Nutrition content was summarised and a checklist developed from the European Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ESPEN) cancer and nutrition guidelines and the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) guidelines for Cancer Survivors. RESULTS: Twelve apps were identified, mean (SD) accountability score was 2.7/8 (2.0) (range 0-6) and quality score was 2.9/5 (0.6) (range 1.7-3.7). Overall, 11 BCTs were used (range 0-8 per app). Nutrition content focussed on healthy eating and meeting energy needs. There was a lack of strategies for implementation and no indication of whether the advice was more suited for specific cancer types, stages or treatment. Limited reference was made to recommendations of ESPEN and the WCRF. A strong positive relationship between quality and number of BCTs was found (r = 0.805, n = 9, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Little nutrition information is currently included on publicly available apps aimed at those with a cancer diagnosis.