Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA) for the Assessment of Body Composition in Oncology: A Scoping Review.

Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA) is a reliable, non-invasive, objective, and cost-effective body composition assessment method, with high reproducibility. This scoping review aims to evaluate the current scientific and clinical evidence on BIA for body composition assessment in oncology patients, under active treatment. Literature search was conducted through MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science databases, following PRISMA-ScR Guidelines. Inclusion criteria comprised studies reporting the use of BIA for body composition evaluation in adults with cancer diagnosis. Studies including non-cancer pathology or only assessing nutritional status were excluded. This scoping review comprised a total of 36 studies: 25 were original studies including 18 prospective studies, six cross-sectional studies and one retrospective study and 11 were systematic reviews. Population size for the included original articles ranged from 18 to 1217 participants, comprising a total of 3015 patients with cancer with a mean baseline Body Mass Index (BMI) ranging from 20.3 to 30.0 kg/m2 and mean age ranging between 47 and 70 years. Review articles included a total of 273 studies, with a total of 78,350 participants. The current review considered studies reporting patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) (n = 8), breast cancer (BC) (n = 4), esophageal cancer (EC) (n = 2), liver cancer (n = 2), pancreatic cancer (PC) (n = 3), gastric cancer (GC) (n = 3), colorectal cancer (CRC) (n = 8), lung cancer (LC) (n = 1), skin cancer (SK) (n = 1) and multiple cancer types (n = 6). BIA is a suitable and valid method for the assessment of body composition in oncology. BIA-derived measures have shown good potential and relevant clinical value in preoperative risk evaluation, in the reduction of postoperative complications and hospital stay and as an important prognostic indicator in persons with cancer. Future research on the diagnostic value and clinical applications of BIA and BIA-derived phase angle (PhA) should be conducted in order to predict its impact on patient survival and other clinical outcomes.

Assessment of nutritional status of oncology patients at hospital admission: A Portuguese real-world study.

Background: Nutritional status in patients with cancer has a determining role in the evolution of the disease and tolerance to treatments. Severity of undernutrition impacts morbidity and mortality in cancer patients and can limit patient response to the optimal therapies if nutritional issues are not appropriately addressed and managed. Despite the importance of malnutrition for the clinical evolution of oncology patients, there is not yet a universally accepted standard method for evaluating malnutrition in such patients. The aim of this study was to stratify the nutritional status of inpatients at an Oncology Department. Methods: This is an observational study with 561 cancer patients, assessed at admission to a Medical Oncology Department from November 2016 to February 2020. All patients were considered eligible. Non-compliant and/or comatose patients were excluded. Nutritional status was assessed using the PG-SGA, BMI classified with the WHO criteria, and calculation of the percentage of weight loss in the previous 3-6 months. Results: A total of 561 patients (303 F: 258 M; mean age 65 ± 13 years) were included. One-third of the patients, n=191/561 (34%), lost 6% of their weight in the month prior to admission and 297/561 (53%) patients lost 10.2% of weight in the previous 6 months. Mean BMI was 24.1 ± 5.8 kg/m2; N = 280/561 (50%) patients had regular BMI according to the WHO criteria. N = 331/561 (59%) patients reported eating less in the month prior to admission. N = 303/561 (54%) had moderate/severe deficits of muscle and adipose compartments. The PG-SGA identified 499/561 (89%) patients as moderately/severely malnourished, of which 466/561 (83%) patients scored ≥9 points, meeting criteria for a critical need for nutritional support. Fifteen percent of patients scored >4 points, indicating a need for directed therapy for symptom control and only 1% scored <2 points (maintenance nutritional counseling). Conclusion: In this oncological setting, a higher proportion of patients were nutritionally-at-risk or with moderate/severe malnutrition. The large majority of patients in this study presented with a critical need for nutritional intervention. These findings highlight the need for an integrated assessment of nutritional status at patient referral. This will allow early and timely nutrition care, which is recommended to prevent or reverse further deterioration of the condition and to optimize treatment administration.