Integrating supportive care into the multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: we can't wait any longer.

INTRODUCTION: Due to important achievements in terms of diagnostic and therapeutic tools and the complexity of the disease itself, lung cancer management needs a multidisciplinary approach. To date, the classical multidisciplinary team involves different healthcare providers mainly dedicated to lung cancer diagnosis and treatments. Nevertheless, the underlying disease and related treatments significantly impact on patient function and psychological well-being. In this sense, supportive care may offer the best approach to relieve and manage patient symptoms and treatment-related adverse events. AREAS COVERED: Evidence reports that exercise, nutrition, smoking cessation, and psychological well-being bring many benefits in patients with lung cancer, from both a physical and socio-psychological points of view, and potentially improving their survival. Nevertheless, supportive care is rarely offered to patients, and even less frequently these needs are discussed within the multidisciplinary meeting. EXPERT OPINION: Integrating supportive care as part of the standard multidisciplinary approach for lung cancer involves a series of challenges, the first one represented by the daily necessity of specialists, such as kinesiologists, dietitians, psycho-oncologists, able to deliver a personalized approach. In the era of precision medicine, this is an essential step forward to guarantee comprehensive and patient-centered care for all patients with lung cancer.

Evaluation of nutritional status in non-small-cell lung cancer: screening, assessment and correlation with treatment outcome.

BackgroundNutritional derangements are common hallmarks of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Nevertheless, their early detection is overlooked in clinical routine. This study aimed to evaluate nutritional status and its correlation with outcome in NSCLC patients.MethodsData regarding NSCLC patients undergoing nutritional evaluation were prospectively collected (May 2016-October 2018). Nutritional risk was assessed by Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002). Bilateral psoas major muscles were measured at L3 vertebrae level with routine staging-computed tomography and changes were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Clinico-pathological and nutritional data were correlated to progression-free/overall survival (PFS/OS) and response rate (ORR) using a Cox and logistic regression model. Kaplan-Meier curves were compared with log-rank test.ResultsThirty-eight patients were included. The majority (65.8%) of them were at nutritional risk (NRS-2002 ≥3). At multivariate analysis for patients with advanced disease, age (HR 2.44, p=0.05), performance status (HR 2.48, p=0.043) and NRS-2002 (HR 1.74, p=0.001) were significant independent predictors for PFS and weight loss (HR 1.07, p=0.008) for OS. Patients with baseline NRS-2002 <3 had significantly longer 1-year PFS (85.7% vs 19.4%, p=0.02) and higher ORR (66.7% vs 21.4%) than those with NRS-2002 ≥3. An explorative evaluation demonstrated that NRS-2002 score significantly decreased after nutritional intervention (p=0.001) for 3 months.ConclusionBaseline nutritional risk represents a prognostic factor in NSCLC. Nutritional counselling should be applied as a fundamental tool to improve nutritional risk in a short period, ameliorating patients' outcome.

Towards the integration and development of a cross-European research network and infrastructure: the DEterminants of DIet and Physical ACtivity (DEDIPAC) Knowledge Hub.

To address major societal challenges and enhance cooperation in research across Europe, the European Commission has initiated and facilitated 'joint programming'. Joint programming is a process by which Member States engage in defining, developing and implementing a common strategic research agenda, based on a shared vision of how to address major societal challenges that no Member State is capable of resolving independently. Setting up a Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) should also contribute to avoiding unnecessary overlap and repetition of research, and enable and enhance the development and use of standardised research methods, procedures and data management. The Determinants of Diet and Physical Activity (DEDIPAC) Knowledge Hub (KH) is the first act of the European JPI 'A Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life'. The objective of DEDIPAC is to contribute to improving understanding of the determinants of dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. DEDIPAC KH is a multi-disciplinary consortium of 46 consortia and organisations supported by joint programming grants from 12 countries across Europe. The work is divided into three thematic areas: (I) assessment and harmonisation of methods for future research, surveillance and monitoring, and for evaluation of interventions and policies; (II) determinants of dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours across the life course and in vulnerable groups; and (III) evaluation and benchmarking of public health and policy interventions aimed at improving dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. In the first three years, DEDIPAC KH will organise, develop, share and harmonise expertise, methods, measures, data and other infrastructure. This should further European research and improve the broad multi-disciplinary approach needed to study the interactions between multilevel determinants in influencing dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. Insights will be translated into more effective interventions and policies for the promotion of healthier behaviours and more effective monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of such interventions.

Assessment of physical activity in anorexia nervosa and treatment outcome.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare objective and subjective assessments of physical activity (PA) in patients with anorexia nervosa and its effect on treatment outcome. METHODS: Both Actiheart (AH) and International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) were used to assess PA in 52 female patients with anorexia nervosa during the first week of inpatient treatment. RESULTS: No correspondence between PA estimated by IPAQ, which had a tendency to underestimate PA, and that measured using AH emerged. However, a significant association was found between the change in Eating Disorder Examination global score at the end of the treatment and light PA measured by AH (beta = -0.12, t = -2.44, P = 0.019), but not that estimated by IPAQ. CONCLUSIONS: PA in patients with anorexia nervosa is underestimated by subjective assessment when compared with objective measurement. Only time spent in light PA, assessed objectively with AH, showed a negative association with improvement in eating disorder psychopathology.

Resting energy expenditure assessment in anorexia nervosa: comparison of indirect calorimetry, a multisensor monitor and the Müller equation.

The aim of this study was to compare the estimations provided by three different means of measuring the resting energy expenditure (REE) in anorexia nervosa (AN) patients. REE was measured, after 24 h of refeeding, using a portable multisensor body monitor [SenseWear Pro2 Armband (SWA)], FitMate™ method and the Müller equation for individuals with body mass index < 18.5, the latter being based on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry assessment of body composition. The mean differences between REE values estimated by SWA and those provided by the Müller equation and the FitMate™ method were significantly different from zero in both cases. In contrast, the mean differences between FitMate™ method and Müller equation were weakly significantly different from zero, and a significant correlation was noted between these two methods. In conclusion, the SWA does not appear to be an alternative to FitMate™ and Müller equation methods for assessing REE in AN patients.