Phase Angle, a Cornerstone of Outcome in Head and Neck Cancer.

In patients with head and neck cancer, malnutrition is common. Most cases are treated by chemo-radiotherapy and surgery, with adverse effects on the aerodigestive area. Clinical and biochemical characteristics, health-related quality of life, survival, and risk of death were studied. The selected subjects were divided into normal- and low-phase-angle (PA) groups and followed up for at least two years. Mean ages were 67.2 and 59.3 years for low and normal PA, respectively. Patients with PA < 4.42° had significant differences in age, anthropometric and biochemical indicators of malnutrition, and inflammatory status compared to patients with PA > 4.42°. Statistical differences were found in the functional and symptom scales, with lower functional scores and higher symptom scores in patients with low PA. Median survival was 19.8 months for those with PA < 4.42° versus 34.4 months for those with PA > 4.42° (p < 0.001).The relative risk of death was related to low PA (2.6; p < 0.001). The percentage of living patients (41.7%) is almost the same as the percentage of deceased subjects (43.1%; p = 0.002), with high death rates in patients with PA < 4.42°. Phase angle was the most crucial predictor of survival and a risk factor for death in the studied cases.

Quality of Life and Functionality of Head and Neck Cancer Patients Are Diminished As a Function of Sarcopenia and Obesity.

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (QoL) is a measure that allows us to know the patient's perception of well-being and how it is affected by their disease and treatments. In cancer patients, sarcopenia has been associated with low scores on various instruments used to assess the QoL; however, little information is available on the effects of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity on the QoL of patients with head and neck cancer (H&NC). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study with 71 H&NC patients aged between 40 and 80 years, we describe the scores on the instruments EORTC QLQ C-30 and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 according to the sarcopenia phenotype (NSG, nonsarcopenic group; SG, sarcopenic group; and SOG, sarcopenic obesity group), hand-grip strength, gait speed, total lymphocyte count, albumin, cholesterol and C-reactive protein, and the relationships between these variables. RESULTS: The prevalence of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity was 48% and 28%, respectively. The QoL analysis showed that NSG had higher scores on the physical functioning scale [NSG 93 (83-100); SG 73 (52-88); SOG 83 (53-93), P = .009] and lower scores on the fatigue scale [NSG 11 (0-22); S 39 (30-67); SOG 44 (14-56); P = .004]. The NSG had a higher hand-grip strength (31.1 kg) than SG (24.1 kg, P = .007) and SOG (26.3 kg, P = .001), and a lower C-reactive protein. The SG and SOG showed no differences between them. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sarcopenia or sarcopenic obesity have lower physical performance and a higher level of fatigue than nonsarcopenic patients. This loss of function can maintain or worsen sarcopenia due to the patient's self-restraint in physical exertion that encourages an increase in muscle tissue.