Body weight and composition endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 4 of the cachexia endpoints series.

Significant variation exists in the outcomes used in cancer cachexia trials, including measures of body composition, which are often selected as primary or secondary endpoints. To date, there has been no review of the most commonly selected measures or their potential sensitivity to detect changes resulting from the interventions being examined. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the frequency and diversity of body composition measures that have been used in cancer cachexia trials. MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched between January 1990 and June 2021. Eligible trials examined adults (≥18 years) who had received an intervention aiming to treat or attenuate the effects of cancer cachexia for >14 days. Trials were also of a prospective controlled design and included body weight or at least one anthropometric, bioelectrical or radiological endpoint pertaining to body composition, irrespective of the modality of intervention (e.g., pharmacological, nutritional, physical exercise and behavioural) or comparator. Trials with a sample size of <40 patients were excluded. Data extraction used Covidence software, and reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. This review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO: CRD42022276710). A total of 84 clinical trials, comprising 13 016 patients, were eligible for inclusion. Non-small-cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer were studied most frequently. The majority of trial interventions were pharmacological (52%) or nutritional (34%) in nature. The most frequently reported endpoints were assessments of body weight (68 trials, n = 11 561) followed by bioimpedance analysis (BIA)-based estimates (23 trials, n = 3140). Sixteen trials (n = 3052) included dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-based endpoints, and computed tomography (CT) body composition was included in eight trials (n = 841). Discrepancies were evident when comparing the efficacy of interventions using BIA-based estimates of lean tissue mass against radiological assessment modalities. Body weight, BIA and DEXA-based endpoints have been most frequently used in cancer cachexia trials. Although the optimal endpoints cannot be determined from this review, body weight, alongside measurements from radiological body composition analysis, would seem appropriate. The choice of radiological modality is likely to be dependent on the trial setting, population and intervention in question. CT and magnetic resonance imaging, which have the ability to accurately discriminate tissue types, are likely to be more sensitive and provide greater detail. Endpoints are of particular importance when aligned with the intervention's mechanism of action and/or intended patient benefit.

Biomarker endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 5 of the cachexia endpoint series.

Regulatory agencies require evidence that endpoints correlate with clinical benefit before they can be used to approve drugs. Biomarkers are often considered surrogate endpoints. In cancer cachexia trials, the measurement of biomarkers features frequently. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the frequency and diversity of biomarker endpoints in cancer cachexia trials. A comprehensive electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane (1990-2023) was completed. Eligible trials met the following criteria: adults (≥18 years), prospective design, more than 40 participants, use of a cachexia intervention for more than 14 days and use of a biomarker(s) as an endpoint. Biomarkers were defined as any objective measure that was assayed from a body fluid, including scoring systems based on these assays. Routine haematology and biochemistry to monitor intervention toxicity were not considered. Data extraction was performed using Covidence, and reporting followed PRISMA guidance (PROSPERO: CRD42022276710). A total of 5975 studies were assessed, of which 52 trials (total participants = 6522) included biomarkers as endpoints. Most studies (n = 29, 55.7%) included a variety of cancer types. Pharmacological interventions (n = 27, 51.9%) were most evaluated, followed by nutritional interventions (n = 20, 38.4%). Ninety-nine different biomarkers were used across the trials, and of these, 96 were assayed from blood. Albumin (n = 29, 55.8%) was assessed most often, followed by C-reactive protein (n = 22, 42.3%), interleukin-6 (n = 16, 30.8%) and tumour necrosis factor-α (n = 14, 26.9%), the latter being the only biomarker that was used to guide sample size calculations. Biomarkers were explicitly listed as a primary outcome in six trials. In total, 12 biomarkers (12.1% of 99) were used in six trials or more. Insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3) and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels both increased significantly in all three trials in which they were both used. This corresponded with a primary outcome, lean body mass, and was related to the pharmacological mechanism. Biomarkers were predominately used as exploratory rather than primary endpoints. The most commonly used biomarker, albumin, was limited by its lack of responsiveness to nutritional intervention. For a biomarker to be responsive to change, it must be related to the mechanism of action of the intervention and/or the underlying cachexia process that is modified by the intervention, as seen with IGFBP-3, IGF-1 and anamorelin. To reach regulatory approval as an endpoint, the relationship between the biomarker and clinical benefit must be clarified.

Central neural mechanisms of cancer cachexia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cachexia is a devasting syndrome which impacts a large number of patients with cancer. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the central mechanisms of cancer cachexia. In particular, it focuses on the role of the central nervous system (CNS), the melanocortin system, circulating hormones and molecules which are produced by and act on the CNS and the psychological symptoms of cancer cachexia. RECENT FINDINGS: A growing body of evidence suggests that a central mechanism of action underpins this multi-system disorder. Recent research has focused on the role of neuroinflammation that drives the sickness behaviour seen in cancer cachexia, with emphasis on the role of the hypothalamus. Melanocortin receptor antagonists are showing promise in preclinical studies. There are also new pharmacological developments to overcome the short half-life of ghrelin. GDF-15 has been identified as a core target and trials of compounds that interfere with its signalling or its central receptor are underway. SUMMARY: Understanding the central mechanisms of cancer cachexia is pivotal for enhancing treatment outcomes in patients. While emerging pharmacological interventions targeting these pathways have shown promise, further research is essential.

Establishing a research partnership to investigate functional loss and rehabilitation towards the end of life.

Background: Functional loss, the inability to perform necessary or desired tasks, is a common consequence of life-limiting illnesses and associated symptoms (pain, fatigue, breathlessness, etc.) and causes suffering for patients and families. Rehabilitation, a set of interventions designed to address functional loss, is recognised as essential within palliative care, as it can improve quality of life and reduce care costs. However, not everyone has equal access to rehabilitation. Despite limited life expectancy or uncertain ability to benefit from interventions, palliative rehabilitation services are often absent. This is partly due to a lack of high-quality research around optimal models of rehabilitation. Research in this area is methodologically challenging and requires multidisciplinary and cross-speciality collaboration. Aim and objectives: We aimed to establish and grow a United Kingdom research partnership across diverse areas, commencing with partners from Edinburgh, East Anglia, Lancashire, Leeds, London and Nottingham, around the topic area of functional loss and rehabilitation in palliative and end-of-life care. The objectives were to (1) develop a multidisciplinary, cross-speciality research partnership, (2) generate high-priority unanswered research questions with stakeholders, (3) co-design and submit high-quality competitive research proposals, including (4) sharing topic and methodological expertise, and (5) to build capacity and capability to deliver nationally generalisable studies. Activities: The partnership was established with professionals from across England and Scotland with complementary areas of expertise including complex palliative and geriatric research, physiotherapy, nursing, palliative medicine and psychology. Research questions were generated through a modified version of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative, which allowed for the collation and refinement of research questions relating to functional loss and rehabilitation towards the end of life. Partnership members were supported through a series of workshops to transform research ideas into proposals for submission to stage one calls by the National Institute for Health and Care Research. The partnership not only supported students, clinicians and public members with training opportunities but also supported clinicians in securing protected time from clinical duties to allow them to focus on developing local research initiatives. Reflections: Through our partnership we established a network that offered researchers, clinicians, students and public members the chance to develop novel skills and explore opportunities for personal and professional development around the topic area of functional loss and rehabilitation in palliative and end-of-life care. The partnership was crucial to foster collaboration and facilitate exchange of ideas, knowledge and experiences to build joint research study proposals. Funding: This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) programme as award number NIHR135171. A plain language summary of this article is available on the NIHR Journals Library website https://doi.org/10.3310/PTHC7598.

'Functional loss' describes a person becoming unable to do the everyday activities they would like or need to do. Life-limiting illnesses and their symptoms can often lead to functional loss: a common source of suffering for patients and their families. Rehabilitation aims to support a person to carry out everyday activities that have been affected by illness. This should be an important part of providing good palliative care. However, in practice, not everyone has equal access to rehabilitation and there is a lack of high-quality research in this area. The Palliative Care Rehabilitation Partnership was created to begin to address these challenges. This partnership completed activities in five key areas: Establishing the partnership ­ Brought together experts from different fields, like palliative care, care for older people and research, to improve rehabilitation for people with life-limiting illnesses. Generating research questions ­ Collected and ranked research questions about functional loss and rehabilitation from various stakeholders, including patients, to identify key research areas. Developing research proposals ­ Helped, through workshops, turn these research questions into detailed proposals for funding. This involved refining ideas, discussing how best to conduct the studies and getting feedback. Building capacity and capability ­ Provided training opportunities for its members, including clinicians, researchers and patients, to improve their research and rehabilitation skills. It also offered mentorship to people with dual roles as clinicians and researchers. Service mapping ­ Improved our understanding of services for functional loss and rehabilitation across different healthcare settings. The Palliative Care Rehabilitation Partnership has made gains in addressing the complex issues of functional loss and rehabilitation in people with life-limiting illnesses. The partnership has supported the development of at least three new research proposals that will be used to apply for future funding.

Quality of life endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic review 3 of the cachexia endpoints series.

The use of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of quality of life (QOL) is common in cachexia trials. Patients' self-report on health, functioning, wellbeing, and perceptions of care, represent important measures of efficacy. This review describes the frequency, variety, and reporting of QOL endpoints used in cancer cachexia clinical trials. Electronic literature searches were performed in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane (1990-2023). Seven thousand four hundred thirty-five papers were retained for evaluation. Eligibility criteria included QOL as a study endpoint using validated measures, controlled design, adults (>18 years), ≥40 participants randomized, and intervention exceeding 2 weeks. The Covidence software was used for review procedures and data extractions. Four independent authors screened all records for consensus. Papers were screened by titles and abstracts, prior to full-text reading. PRISMA guidance for systematic reviews was followed. The protocol was prospectively registered via PROSPERO (CRD42022276710). Fifty papers focused on QOL. Twenty-four (48%) were double-blind randomized controlled trials. Sample sizes varied considerably (n = 42 to 469). Thirty-nine trials (78%) included multiple cancer types. Twenty-seven trials (54%) featured multimodal interventions with various drugs and dietary supplements, 11 (22%) used nutritional interventions alone and 12 (24%) used a single pharmacological intervention only. The median duration of the interventions was 12 weeks (4-96). The most frequent QOL measure was the EORTC QLQ-C30 (60%), followed by different FACIT questionnaires (34%). QOL was a primary, secondary, or exploratory endpoint in 15, 31 and 4 trials respectively, being the single primary in six. Statistically significant results on one or more QOL items favouring the intervention group were found in 18 trials. Eleven of these used a complete multidimensional measure. Adjustments for multiple testing when using multicomponent QOL measures were not reported. Nine trials (18%) defined a statistically or clinically significant difference for QOL, five with QOL as a primary outcome, and four with QOL as a secondary outcome. Correlation statistics with other study outcomes were rarely performed. PROMs including QOL are important endpoints in cachexia trials. We recommend using well-validated QOL measures, including cachexia-specific items such as weight history, appetite loss, and nutritional intake. Appropriate statistical methods with definitions of clinical significance, adjustment for multiple testing and few co-primary endpoints are encouraged, as is an understanding of how interventions may relate to changes in QOL endpoints. A strategic and scientific-based approach to PROM research in cachexia trials is warranted, to improve the research base in this field and avoid the use of QOL as supplementary measures.

Appetite and dietary intake endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 2 of the cachexia endpoints series.

There is no consensus on the optimal endpoint(s) in cancer cachexia trials. Endpoint variation is an obstacle when comparing interventions and their clinical value. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and evaluate endpoints used to assess appetite and dietary intake in cancer cachexia clinical trials. A search for studies published from 1 January 1990 until 2 June 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible studies examined cancer cachexia treatment versus a comparator in adults with assessments of appetite and/or dietary intake as study endpoints, a sample size ≥40 and an intervention lasting ≥14 days. Reporting was in line with PRISMA guidance, and a protocol was published in PROSPERO (2022 CRD42022276710). This review is part of a series of systematic reviews examining cachexia endpoints. Of the 5975 articles identified, 116 were eligible for the wider review series and 80 specifically examined endpoints of appetite (65 studies) and/or dietary intake (21 studies). Six trials assessed both appetite and dietary intake. Appetite was the primary outcome in 15 trials and dietary intake in 7 trials. Median sample size was 101 patients (range 40-628). Forty-nine studies included multiple primary tumour sites, while 31 studies involved single primary tumour sites (15 gastrointestinal, 7 lung, 7 head and neck and 2 female reproductive organs). The most frequently reported appetite endpoints were visual analogue scale (VAS) and numerical rating scale (NRS) (40%). The appetite item from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) C30/C15 PAL (38%) and the appetite question from North Central Cancer Treatment Group anorexia questionnaire (17%) were also frequently applied. Of the studies that assessed dietary intake, 13 (62%) used food records (prospective registrations) and 10 (48%) used retrospective methods (24-h recall or dietary history). For VAS/NRS, a mean change of 1.3 corresponded to Hedge's g of 0.5 and can be considered a moderate change. For food records, a mean change of 231 kcal/day or 11 g of protein/day corresponded to a moderate change. Choice of endpoint in cachexia trials will depend on factors pertinent to the trial to be conducted. Nevertheless, from trials assessed and available literature, NRS or EORTC QLQ C30/C15 PAL seems suitable for appetite assessments. Appetite and dietary intake endpoints are rarely used as primary outcomes in cancer cachexia. Dietary intake assessments were used mainly to monitor compliance and are not validated in cachexia populations. Given the importance to cachexia studies, dietary intake endpoints must be validated before they are used as endpoints in clinical trials.

Prognostic value of the Scottish Inflammatory prognostic Score in patients with NSCLC expressing PD-L1 ≥ 50 % progressing on first-line pembrolizumab.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy will experience progressive disease (PD). Only a minority will go on to receive subsequent systemic anticancer therapy for which outcomes are guarded. We investigated the prognostic significance of biomarkers of systemic inflammation following failure of first-line pembrolizumab for NSCLC to aid subsequent management decisions. METHODS: Patients with radiological and/or clinical evidence of PD on first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC at a regional Scottish cancer centre were identified. Inflammatory biomarkers at the time of PD, including serum albumin, neutrophil count and the Scottish Inflammatory Prognostic Score (SIPS; combing albumin and neutrophils), and clinicopathological factors, including age, sex, histology, PDL1 expression and time to PD were recorded. The relationship between these and post-progression overall survival (ppOS) were examined. RESULTS: Data were available for 211 patients. Median ppOS was 2.1 months. Only SIPS was predictive of ppOS on multivariate analysis (HR2.54 (95 %CI 1.81-3.56) (<0.001)), stratifying ppOS from 0.8 months (SIPS2), to 1.8 months (SIPS1), to 8.1 months (SIPS0) (p < 0.001). Thirty (14 %) patients received second-line systemic anticancer therapy with median ppOS 8.7 months. These patients had lower levels of systemic inflammation, as defined by albumin (p < 0.001), neutrophil count (p = 0.002), and SIPS (p = 0.004)), than all other patients. CONCLUSIONS: SIPS, a simple biomarker of systemic inflammation, predicts ppOS after first-line pembrolizumab and may be useful alongside routine assessments of patient fitness to inform individualised discussions about subsequent treatment. We highlight poor outcomes in this patient group and a role for SIPS in signposting transition to best supportive care and early referral to palliative care. It may also help identify a small group of patients most likely to benefit from further lines of therapy.

Immune-Related Adverse Events, Biomarkers of Systemic Inflammation, and Survival Outcomes in Patients Receiving Pembrolizumab for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab monotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) expressing PD-L1 ≥ 50% doubles five-year survival rates compared to chemotherapy. However, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) can cause severe, long-term toxicity necessitating high-dose steroids and/or treatment cessation. Interestingly, patients experiencing irAEs demonstrate better survival outcomes. Biomarkers of systemic inflammation, including the Scottish Inflammatory Prognostic Score (SIPS), also predict survival in this patient group. This study examines the relationship between inflammatory status, irAEs, and survival outcomes in NSCLC. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with NSCLC expressing PD-L1 ≥ 50% receiving first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy at a large cancer centre in Scotland. Regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between SIPS, irAEs, and survival. RESULTS: 83/262 eligible patients (32%) experienced an irAE. Dermatological, endocrine, gastrointestinal, and hepatic, but not pulmonary, irAEs were associated with prolonged PFS and OS (p <= 0.011). Mild irAEs were associated with better PFS and OS in all patients, including on time-dependent analyses (HR0.61 [95% CI 0.41-0.90], p = 0.014 and HR0.41 [95% CI 0.26-0.63], p < 0.001, respectively). SIPS predicted PFS (HR 1.60 [95% CI 1.34-1.90], p < 0.001) and OS (HR 1.69 [95% CI 1.41-2.02], p < 0.001). SIPS predicted the occurrence of any irAE in all patients (p = 0.011), but not on 24-week landmark analyses (p = 0.174). The occurrence of irAEs predicted favourable outcomes regardless of the baseline inflammatory status (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: The occurrence of certain irAEs is associated with a survival benefit in patients with NSCLC expressing PD-L1 ≥ 50% receiving pembrolizumab. We find that the association between low levels of systemic inflammation and the risk of irAEs is confounded by their independent prognostic value.

Physical function endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 1 of the cachexia endpoints series.

In cancer cachexia trials, measures of physical function are commonly used as endpoints. For drug trials to obtain regulatory approval, efficacy in physical function endpoints may be needed alongside other measures. However, it is not clear which physical function endpoints should be used. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the frequency and diversity of physical function endpoints in cancer cachexia trials. Following a comprehensive electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane (1990-2021), records were retrieved. Eligible trials met the following criteria: adults (≥18 years), controlled design, more than 40 participants, use of a cachexia intervention for more than 14 days and use of a physical function endpoint. Physical function measures were classified as an objective measure (hand grip strength [HGS], stair climb power [SCP], timed up and go [TUG] test, 6-min walking test [6MWT] and short physical performance battery [SPPB]), clinician assessment of function (Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS] or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status [ECOG-PS]) or patient-reported outcomes (physical function subscale of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires [EORTC QLQ-C30 or C15]). Data extraction was performed using Covidence and followed PRISMA guidance (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022276710). A total of 5975 potential studies were examined and 71 were eligible. Pharmacological interventions were assessed in 38 trials (54%). Of these, 11 (29%, n = 1184) examined megestrol and 5 (13%, n = 1928) examined anamorelin; nutritional interventions were assessed in 21 trials (30%); and exercise-based interventions were assessed in 6 trials (8%). The remaining six trials (8%) assessed multimodal interventions. Among the objective measures of physical function (assessed as primary or secondary endpoints), HGS was most commonly examined (33 trials, n = 5081) and demonstrated a statistically significant finding in 12 (36%) trials (n = 2091). The 6MWT was assessed in 12 trials (n = 1074) and was statistically significant in 4 (33%) trials (n = 403), whereas SCP, TUG and SPPB were each assessed in 3 trials. KPS was more commonly assessed than the newer ECOG-PS (16 vs. 9 trials), and patient-reported EORTC QLQ-C30 physical function was reported in 25 trials. HGS is the most commonly used physical function endpoint in cancer cachexia clinical trials. However, heterogeneity in study design, populations, intervention and endpoint selection make it difficult to comment on the optimal endpoint and how to measure this. We offer several recommendations/considerations to improve the design of future clinical trials in cancer cachexia.

The prognostic impact of pre-treatment cachexia in resectional surgery for oesophagogastric cancer: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Cancer cachexia is not purely an end-stage phenomenon and can influence the outcomes of patients with potentially curable disease. This review examines the effect of pre-treatment cachexia on overall survival, in patients undergoing surgical resection of oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases was conducted, from January 2000 to May 2022, to identify studies reporting the influence of cachexia on patients undergoing an oesophagogastric resection for cancer with curative intent. Meta-analyses of the primary (overall survival) and secondary (disease-free survival and postoperative mortality) outcomes were performed using random-effects modelling. Meta-regression was used to examine disease stage as a potential confounder. RESULTS: Ten non-randomized studies, comprising 7186 patients, were eligible for inclusion. The prevalence of pre-treatment cachexia was 35 per cent (95 per cent c.i.: 24-47 per cent). Pooled adjusted hazard ratios showed that cachexia was adversely associated with overall survival (HR 1.46, 95 per cent c.i.: 1.31-1.60, P < 0.001). Meta-analysis of proportions identified decreased overall survival at 1-, 3- and 5-years in cachectic cohorts. Pre-treatment cachexia was not a predictor of disease-free survival and further data are required to establish its influence on postoperative mortality. The proportion of patients with stage III/IV disease was a significant moderator of between-study heterogeneity. Cachexia may have a greater influence on overall survival in studies where more patients have a locally advanced malignancy. CONCLUSION: Pre-treatment cachexia adversely influences overall survival following resection of an oesophagogastric malignancy.

Are CT-Derived Muscle Measurements Prognostic, Independent of Systemic Inflammation, in Good Performance Status Patients with Advanced Cancer?

The present study examined the relationships between CT-derived muscle measurements, systemic inflammation, and survival in advanced cancer patients with good performance status (ECOG-PS 0/1). Data was collected prospectively from patients with advanced cancer undergoing anti-cancer therapy with palliative intent. The CT Sarcopenia score (CT-SS) was calculated by combining the CT-derived skeletal muscle index (SMI) and density (SMD). The systemic inflammatory status was determined using the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS). The primary outcome of interest was overall survival (OS). Univariate and multivariate Cox regressions were used for survival analysis. Three hundred and seven patients met the inclusion criteria, out of which 62% (n = 109) were male and 47% (n = 144) were ≥65 years of age, while 38% (n = 118) were CT-SS ≥ 1 and 47% (n = 112) of patients with pre-study blood were inflamed (mGPS ≥ 1). The median survival from entry to the study was 11.1 months (1-68.1). On univariate analysis, cancer type (p < 0.05) and mGPS (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with OS. On multivariate analysis, only mGPS (p < 0.001) remained significantly associated with OS. In patients who were ECOG-PS 0, mGPS was significantly associated with CT-SS (p < 0.05). mGPS may dominate the prognostic value of CT-derived sarcopenia in good-performance-status patients with advanced cancer.

Longitudinal characterisation of cachexia in patients undergoing surgical resection for cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The complexity of the cancer cachexia phenotype has undoubtedly hindered researchers' understanding of this devastating syndrome. The presence and magnitude of host-tumour interactions are rarely considered during clinical decision-making within the current staging paradigm. Furthermore, treatment options for those patients who are identified as suffering from cancer cachexia remain extremely limited. RECENT FINDINGS: Previous attempts to characterise cachexia have largely focussed on individual surrogate disease markers, often studied across a limited timeframe. While the adverse prognostic value of clinical and biochemical features is evident, the relationships between these are less clear. Investigation of patients with earlier-stage disease could allow researchers to identify markers of cachexia that precede the refractory stage of the wasting process. Appreciation of the cachectic phenotype within 'curative' populations may aid our understanding of the syndrome's genesis and provide potential routes for prevention, rather than treatment. SUMMARY: Holistic, longitudinal characterisation of cancer cachexia, across all at-risk and affected populations, is of vital importance for future research in the field. This paper presents the protocol for an observational study aiming to create a robust and holistic characterisation of surgical patients with, or at risk of, cancer cachexia.

Integrated Short-term Palliative Rehabilitation to improve quality of life and equitable care access in incurable cancer (INSPIRE): a multinational European research project.

Background: Disability related to incurable cancer affects over a million Europeans each year and people with cancer rank loss of function among the most common unmet supportive care needs. Objectives: To test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an integrated short-term palliative rehabilitation intervention, to optimise function and quality of life in people affected by incurable cancer. Design: This is a multinational, parallel group, randomised, controlled, assessor blind, superiority trial. Methods: The INSPIRE consortium brings together leaders in palliative care, oncology and rehabilitation from partner organisations across Europe, with complementary expertise in health service research, trials of complex interventions, mixed-method evaluations, statistics and economics. Partnership with leading European civil society organisations ensures citizen engagement and dissemination at the highest level. We will conduct a multinational randomised controlled trial across five European countries, recruiting participants to assess the effectiveness of palliative rehabilitation for people with incurable cancer on the primary outcome - quality of life - and secondary outcomes including disability, symptom burden and goal attainment. To support trial conduct and enhance analysis of trial data, we will also conduct: comparative analysis of current integration of rehabilitation across oncology and palliative care services; mixed-method evaluations of equity and inclusivity, processes and implementation for the intervention, at patient, health service and health system levels. Finally, we will conduct an evidence synthesis, incorporating INSPIRE findings, and a Delphi consensus to develop an international framework for palliative rehabilitation practice and policy, incorporating indicators, core interventions, outcomes and integration methods. Scientific contribution: If positive, the trial could produce a scalable and equitable intervention to improve function and quality of life in people with incurable cancer and reduce the burden of care for their families. It could also upskill the practitioners involved and motivate future research questions. The intervention could be adapted and integrated into different health systems using existing staff and services, with little or no additional cost.

Cancer cachexia - adopting a systems wide approach.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cancer cachexia results in the death of approximately 2 million people worldwide annually. Despite the impact of this devastating condition, there is limited therapy and no standard of care. Although multiple definitions exist, confusion remains as a true understanding of the biology has not yet been achieved and distinct phases of cachexia have not been examined. Research has mainly focused on weight loss and muscle wasting, but cachexia is increasingly recognized as a multiorgan disorder involving adipose tissue, liver, brain, gut and heart, with systemic inflammation a central unifying feature. RECENT FINDINGS: In this review, we will discuss some of the extra-muscular features and multisystem interactions in cachexia, and describe how moving our focus beyond muscle can lead to a greater understanding of the mechanisms and clinical features seen in cachexia. SUMMARY: We describe the need for robust characterization of patients with cachexia, to allow clinical phenotypes and multisystem mechanisms to be untangled, and to enable the implementation of multimodal treatment strategies.

The Impact of Acute Systemic Inflammation Secondary to Oesophagectomy and Anastomotic Leak on Computed Tomography Body Composition Analyses.

This study aimed to longitudinally assess CT body composition analyses in patients who experienced anastomotic leak post-oesophagectomy. Consecutive patients, between 1 January 2012 and 1 January 2022 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Changes in computed tomography (CT) body composition at the third lumbar vertebral level (remote from the site of complication) were assessed across four time points where available: staging, pre-operative/post-neoadjuvant treatment, post-leak, and late follow-up. A total of 20 patients (median 65 years, 90% male) were included, with a total of 66 computed tomography (CT) scans analysed. Of these, 16 underwent neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy prior to oesophagectomy. Skeletal muscle index (SMI) was significantly reduced following neoadjuvant treatment (p < 0.001). Following the inflammatory response associated with surgery and anastomotic leak, a decrease in SMI (mean difference: -4.23 cm2/m2, p < 0.001) was noted. Estimates of intramuscular and subcutaneous adipose tissue quantity conversely increased (both p < 0.001). Skeletal muscle density fell (mean difference: -5.42 HU, p = 0.049) while visceral and subcutaneous fat density were higher following anastomotic leak. Thus, all tissues trended towards the radiodensity of water. Although tissue radiodensity and subcutaneous fat area normalised on late follow-up scans, skeletal muscle index remained below pre-treatment levels.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Cachexia.

Cachexia is a multifactorial syndrome that is common in cancer and chronic disease. It is often underdiagnosed and therefore goes untreated or undertreated. Cachexia causes suffering across biopsychosocial domains and affects patients and their loved ones. In this article, a group of clinicians and researchers across cancer care, nutrition, and exercise offers tips about assessment, classification, and management of cachexia, with attention to its stage. The required multimodal management of cachexia mirrors well the interprofessional collaboration that is the mainstay of interdisciplinary palliative care and attention to screening, diagnosis, and management of cachexia is critical to maximize patients' quality of life.

Lactate dehydrogenase: relationship with the diagnostic GLIM criterion for cachexia in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although suggestive of dysregulated metabolism, the relationship between serum LDH level, phenotypic/aetiologic diagnostic Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and survival in patients with advanced cancer has yet to examined. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from patients with advanced cancer, undergoing anti-cancer therapy with palliative intent, across nine sites in the UK and Ireland between 2011-2016, was retrospectively analysed. LDH values were grouped as <250/250-500/>500 Units/L. Relationships were examined using χ2 test for linear-by-linear association and binary logistics regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 436 patients met the inclusion criteria. 46% (n = 200) were male and 59% (n = 259) were ≥65 years of age. The median serum LDH was 394 Units/L and 33.5% (n = 146) had an LDH > 500 Units/L. LDH was significantly associated with ECOG-PS (p < 0.001), NLR (p < 0.05), mGPS (p < 0.05) and 3-month survival (p < 0.001). LDH was significantly associated with 3-month survival independent of weight loss (p < 0.01), BMI (p < 0.05), skeletal muscle mass (p < 0.01), metastatic disease (p < 0.05), NLR (p < 0.05) and mGPS (p < 0.01). DISCUSSION: LDH was associated with performance status, systemic inflammation and survival in patients with advanced cancer. LDH measurement may be considered as an aetiologic criteria and become a potential therapeutic target in the treatment of cancer cachexia.

Inflammation and Performance Status: The Cornerstones of Prognosis in Advanced Cancer.

CONTEXT: In advanced cancer, although performance status (PS), systemic inflammatory response and nutritional status are known to have prognostic value, geographical variations and sociodemographic indexes may also impact survival. OBJECTIVES: This study compares validated prognostic factors in two international cohorts and establishes a prognostic framework for treatment. METHODS: Two international biobanks of patients (n=1.518) with advanced cancer were analyzed. Prognostic factors (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status [ECOG-PS], body mass index [BMI] and modified Glasgow Prognostic Score [mGPS]) were assessed. The relationship between these and survival was examined using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods. RESULTS: According to multivariate analysis, in the European cohort the most highly predictive factors were BMI <20 kg/m2 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.644), BMI 20-21.9 kg/m2 (HR 1.347), ECOG-PS (HR 1.597-11.992) and mGPS (HR 1.843-2.365). In the Brazilian cohort, the most highly predictive factors were ECOG-PS (HR 1.678-8.938) and mGPS (HR 2.103-2.837). Considering gastrointestinal cancers in particular (n=551), the survival rate at 3 months in both cohorts together ranged from 93% (mGPS 0, PS 0-1) to 0% (mGPS 2, PS 4), and from 81% (mGPS 0, BMI >28 kg/m2) to 44% (mGPS 2, BMI <20 kg/m2). CONCLUSION: The established prognostic factors that were compared had similar prognostic capacity in both cohorts. A high ECOG-PS and a high mGPS as outlined in the ECOG-PS/mGPS framework were consistently associated with poorer survival of patients with advanced cancer in the prospective European and Brazilian cohorts.

Cannabinoids in the treatment of cancer anorexia and cachexia: Where have we been, where are we going?

Cachexia-anorexia cancer syndrome remains an unmet clinical need with a dearth of treatment and no standard of care. Acting through the endocannabinoid system, cannabinoids are one potential cancer cachexia treatment. Herein, the potential mechanisms for cannabinoids for cancer cachexia are discussed as are previous and ongoing clinical trials.