The Impact of Malnutrition on the Quality of Life of Colorectal Cancer Patients in a Tertiary Hospital.

Malnutrition among colorectal cancer patients can impair quality of life and decrease survival. This study evaluated the nutritional status of colorectal cancer patients and its association with quality of life among Filipino colorectal cancer patients seen in a tertiary hospital. A cross-sectional study was conducted among colorectal cancer patients seen at the Philippine General Hospital between December 1, 2019 and February 28, 2020. Nutritional status was evaluated using the Subjective Global Assessment, while quality of life was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA and logistic regression were employed for analysis. Among 292 patients, malnutrition was noted in 76.4%. Stage III cancer had a higher odds for malnutrition (OR (odds ratio) = 6.22, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.59, 24.42). Patients who received or were currently receiving chemotherapy were less likely to develop malnutrition (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.18-0.69). Global health status and all functional subscale scores for the severely malnourished group were lower while the scores for symptom scales increased with the degree of malnutrition. There was a high prevalence of malnutrition among colorectal cancer patients and this was associated with poor quality of life. Future directions emphasizing early nutritional screening and assessment are recommended.

Medical oncology care amidst the COVID-19 pandemic at the National University Hospital in the Philippines.

COVID-19 has abruptly and radically changed the landscape of cancer care delivery throughout the world, including the Philippines. The Philippine General Hospital is the academic hospital of the University of the Philippines. Its cancer centre is a primary referral centre that takes care of Filipinos-many resource-constrained-that are burdened by malignancy. As the global pandemic challenges healthcare delivery, centres are forced to rethink how to care for their patients. This paper discusses how a national, academic, referral cancer institute in a low-middle income country is trying to meet the challenges of COVID-19.

Transdermal versus oral granisetron in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of transdermal granisetron versus oral granisetron in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with cancer METHODS: Data sources were CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Clinicaltrials.gov , and Google Scholar. Inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials comparing transdermal versus oral granisetron in patients with CINV. For data extraction, two authors independently analyzed the methodological quality and extracted data. A random effects model was used to estimate the risk ratio (RR) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Three studies (1086 patients) were included. Oral granisetron is superior (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99) to its transdermal form in achieving complete control of CINV in patients receiving chemotherapy. As for the risk of constipation (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.73 to 2.40) and QTc prolongation (RR 0.17; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.40) as adverse effects, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two routes. CONCLUSION: Oral granisetron is better in achieving complete control of CINV in patients receiving chemotherapy. As for the risk of constipation and QTc prolongation as adverse effects, there was no statistically significant difference between the two routes.