Relationship of Inflammatory Parameters and Nutritional Status in Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Chronic inflammation and cytokine storm can cause uncontrolled events in cancer. Pro-inflammatory molecules released by malignant cells send signals to the brain, liver, and neuroendocrine cells, interfering with appetite and promoting anorexia. Malnutrition in cancer patients is associated with increased treatment toxicity, reduced physical efficiency, and decreased survival. Therefore, early recognition of malnutrition could improve quality of life, treatment compliance, and survival. The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between inflammatory parameters with disease stage and nutritional status in patients with solid cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We screened 77 consecutive patients from 3 clinical Institutions in Sicily, Italy, with solid tumors who were either in follow-up after curative treatment or being treated for metastatic disease using the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) questionnaire. Inflammatory parameters, including interleukin 6 (IL6), C-reactive protein (CRP), ß2-microglobulin, ferritin, and transferrin were evaluated. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was found in mean values of IL6, CRP, ß2-microglobulin, ferritin, and transferrin between patients without evidence of disease and metastatic patients. Among the metastatic group, there was a significant difference in mean values of these inflammatory parameters between patients with malnutrition and those with normal nutritional status. The difference in average IL6, CRP, ß2-microglobulin, and ferritin between patients at risk of malnutrition and those with normal nutritional status was also significant. However, the difference between patients at risk of malnutrition and those with malnutrition was not significant. CONCLUSION: IL6, CRP, transferrin, ferritin, and ß2-microglobulin are functional inflammatory parameters that indicate risk of malnutrition and support the MNA screening test to identify patients with solid tumors who require nutritional support.

A Prospective Observational Study on the Structuring Process and Implementation of a Large Regional, Inter-hospital, Virtual Multidisciplinary Tumor Board on Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: At present, multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTB) are considered best practice in oncology. However, web-based virtualization of MDTB may increase participation in meetings, the number of cases discussed, and adherence to guidelines, deliver better treatment, and eventually improve outcomes for patients with prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is an observational study focused on exploring the structuring process and implementing a multi-institutional virtual MDTB in Sicily, Italy. Other endpoints included the analysis of cooperation between participants, adherence to guidelines, patient outcomes, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Overall, 126 patients were referred to the virtual MDTB for a total of 302 cases discussed in an 18-month period. Nearly 45% of cases were referred from general hospitals or tertiary centers, 38% from comprehensive cancer centers, and only 17% from academic ones. Most health professional participants (95%) reported eliminating geographical barriers and consequently reducing costs and saving time as key advantages of virtual meetings over face-to-face ones. Using a specifically designed platform for virtual MDTBs was another excellent point, especially to geolocate clinical trials and time-lapse data storage. The majority of referred patients had stage T 3-4 prostate cancer (79%). Overall, 71% of proposals discussed were approved unchanged, while 19% changed after the virtual MDTB discussion. Debated points were mostly radiologic, surgical, medical, or radiation treatment-related issues. In particular, the prescriptive appropriateness of positron emission tomography with 68Ga-prostatic specific membrane antigen, newer drugs, radiation versus surgical approach, stage T3-4 cases, and adjuvant therapy represented the most debated issues. The proposed diagnostic and/or therapeutic options were controlled for adherence to the guidelines and/or updated scientific evidence. Overall, 98% of approved proposals and changes were in line with the guidelines. Overall, most participants felt virtual MDTB was very useful and case discussions led to a major change of strategy in 19% of cases. CONCLUSION: Virtual MDTBs are a very useful way to achieve best management of prostate cancer while saving time and fostering cooperation.