Nutritional status, cachexia and survival in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma. Different assessment criteria for nutritional status provide unequal results.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Different nutrition assessment tools and definitions are proposed for cancer-associated malnutrition and wasting (cachexia). We studied the associations between these assessments and overall survival in stage IV colorectal carcinoma patients. METHODS: Anthropometric measures, energy intake, biochemical variables, nutritional risk screening, assessment of malnutrition, cachexia and body composition from computed tomography images were analysed, in 77 patients from Norway and Canada. Results were dichotomized into presence or absence of nutritional risk, malnutrition, cachexia and sarcopenia (low muscle mass) and associated with survival. RESULTS: Overall, 22% up to 55% of the patients had cachexia according to different cachexia criteria: 34% were malnourished, 42% were at nutritional risk, and 39% were sarcopenic. Forty-four percent of the patients did not meet criteria for any of these conditions. Patients with cachexia defined by Cancer Cachexia Study Group (CCSG) had shorter survival in an unadjusted analysis, [Hazard ratio (HR) = 2.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-4.47; P = 0.005]. After adjusting for nation, age and gender, cachexia (HR = 2.26; CI 1.18-4.32; P = 0.014) and malnutrition (HR = 1.83; CI 1.06-3.13; P = 0.029) remained significant predictors of survival. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional depletion in up to 55% of the patients was found. The lack of concordance between the results obtained by different assessment criteria was obvious. CCSG's cachexia score was the best prognostic factor for overall survival.

Proton therapy - a systematic review of clinical effectiveness.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Proton therapy is an emerging treatment modality for cancer that may have distinct advantages over conventional radiotherapy. This relates to its ability to confine the high-dose treatment area to the tumour volume and thus minimizing radiation dose to surrounding normal tissue. Several proton facilities are currently operating or under planning world-wide - in the United States, Asia and Europe. Until now no systematic review assessing the clinical effectiveness of this treatment modality has been published. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of published studies that investigated clinical efficacy of proton therapy of cancer. RESULTS: We included 54 publications: 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported in 5 publications, 5 comparative studies and 44 case series. Two RCTs addressed proton irradiation as a boost following conventional radiation therapy for prostate cancer, where one demonstrated improved biochemical local control for the highest dose group without increased serious complication rates. Proton therapy has been used to treat a large number of patients with ocular tumours, but except for one low quality RCT, no proper comparison with other treatment alternatives has been undertaken. Proton therapy offers the option to deliver higher radiation doses and/or better confinement of the treatment of intracranial tumours in children and adults, but reported studies are heterogeneous in design and do not allow for strict conclusions. CONCLUSION: The evidence on clinical efficacy of proton therapy relies to a large extent on non-controlled studies, and thus is associated with low level of evidence according to standard heath technology assessment and evidence based medicine criteria.