Feasibility of two levels of protein intake in patients with colorectal cancer: findings from the Protein Recommendation to Increase Muscle (PRIMe) randomized controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Low muscle mass (MM) predicts unfavorable outcomes in cancer. Protein intake supports muscle health, but oncologic recommendations are not well characterized. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the feasibility of dietary change to attain 1.0 or 2.0 g/kg/day protein diets, and the preliminary potential to halt MM loss and functional decline in patients starting chemotherapy for stage II-IV colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to the diets and provided individualized counseling. Assessments at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks included weighed 3-day food records, appendicular lean soft tissue index (ALSTI) by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to estimate MM, and physical function by the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) test. RESULTS: Fifty patients (mean ± standard deviation: age, 57 ± 11 years; body mass index, 27.3 ± 5.6 kg/m2; and protein intake, 1.1 ± 0.4 g/kg/day) were included at baseline. At week 12, protein intake reached 1.6 g/kg/day in the 2.0 g/kg/day group and 1.2 g/kg/day in the 1.0 g/kg/day group (P = 0.012), resulting in a group difference of 0.4 g/kg/day rather than 1.0 g/kg/day. Over one-half (59%) of patients in the 2.0 g/kg/day group maintained or gained MM compared with 44% of patients in the 1.0 g/kg/day group (P = 0.523). Percent change in ALSTI did not differ between groups [2.0 g/kg/day group (mean ± standard deviation): 0.5% ± 4.6%; 1.0 g/kg/day group: -0.4% ± 6.1%; P = 0.619]. No differences in physical function were observed between groups. However, actual protein intake and SPPB were positively associated (ß = 0.37; 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.67; P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Individualized nutrition counselling positively impacted protein intake. However, 2.0 g/kg/day was not attainable using our approach in this population, and group contamination occurred. Increased protein intake suggested positive effects on MM and physical function, highlighting the potential for nutrition to attenuate MM loss in patients with cancer. Nonetheless, muscle anabolism to any degree is clinically significant and beneficial to patients. Larger trials should explore the statistical significance and clinical relevance of protein interventions.

Does Loosening the Inclusion Criteria of the CROSS Trial Impact Outcomes in the Curative-Intent Trimodality Treatment of Oesophageal and Gastroesophageal Cancer Patients?

AIM: To determine the efficacy of preoperative chemoradiotherapy as per the CROSS protocol for oesophageal/gastroesophageal junction cancer (OEGEJC), when expanded to patients outside of the inclusion/exclusion criteria defined in the original clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively on 229 OEGEJC patients referred for curative-intent preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Outcomes including pathological complete response (pCR), overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients who met CROSS inclusion criteria (MIC) versus those who failed to meet criteria (FMIC) were determined. RESULTS: In total, 42.8% of patients MIC, whereas 57.2% FMIC; 16.6% of patients did not complete definitive surgery. The MIC cohort had higher rates of pCR, when compared with the FMIC cohort (33.3% versus 20.6%, P = 0.039). The MIC cohort had a better RFS, cancer-specific survival and OS compared with the FMIC cohort (P = 0.006, P = 0.004 and P = 0.009, respectively). Age >75 years and pretreatment weight loss >10% were not associated with a poorer RFS (P = 0.541 and 0.458, respectively). Compared with stage I-III patients, stage IVa was associated with a poorer RFS (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.158; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.339-3.480, P = 0.001). Tumours >8 cm in length or >5 cm in width had a trend towards worse RFS (HR = 2.060; 95% CI = 0.993-4.274, P = 0.052). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that the robust requirements of the CROSS trial may limit treatment for patients with potentially curable OEGEJC and can be adapted to include patients with a good performance status who are older than 75 years or have >10% pretreatment weight loss. However, the inclusion of patients with celiac nodal metastases or tumours >8 cm in length or >5 cm in width may be associated with poor outcomes.

Challenges in the comparative study of empathy and related phenomena in animals.

The aim of this review is to discuss recent arguments and findings in the comparative study of empathy. Based on a multidisciplinary approach including psychology and ethology, we review the non-human animal literature concerning theoretical frameworks, methodology, and research outcomes. One specific objective is to highlight discrepancies between theory and empirical findings, and to discuss ambiguities present in current data and their interpretation. In particular, we focus on emotional contagion and its experimental investigation, and on consolation and targeted helping as measures for sympathy. Additionally, we address the feasibility of comparing across species with behavioural data alone. One main conclusion of our review is that animal research on empathy still faces the challenge of closing the gap between theoretical concepts and empirical evidence. To advance our knowledge, we propose to focus more on the emotional basis of empathy, rather than on possibly ambiguous behavioural indicators, and we provide suggestions to overcome the limitations of previous research .

Consensus statement: the 16th Annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference; Saskatoon, Saskatchewan; September 5-6, 2014.

The 16th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference was held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, September 4-5, 2014. The Consensus Conference is an interactive, multidisciplinary event attended by health care professionals from across western Canada (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) involved in the care of gastrointestinal cancer. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists; pathologists; radiologists; and allied health care professionals participated in presentation and discussion sessions for the purposes of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses current issues in the management of colorectal cancer.

Canadian Expert Group consensus recommendations: KRAS testing in colorectal cancer.

Monoclonal antibodies against the epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-egfr) when used in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer are associated with improved survival. Patients whose tumours harbor a KRAS mutation in codon 12 or 13 have been shown not to benefit from anti-egfr antibodies. The importance of KRAS mutation status in the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer has led to the elaboration of Canadian consensus recommendations on KRAS testing, with the aim of standardizing practice across Canada and reconciling testing access with the clinical demand for testing. The present guidelines were developed at a Canadian consensus meeting held in Montreal in April 2010. The best available evidence and expertise were used to develop recommendations for various aspects of KRAS testing, including indications and timing for testing, sample requirements, recommendations for reporting requirements, and acceptable turnaround times.

XELOX vs FOLFOX-4 as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: NO16966 updated results.

BACKGROUND: We report updated overall survival (OS) data from study NO16966, which compared capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) vs 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: NO16966 was a randomised, two-arm, non-inferiority, phase III comparison of XELOX vs FOLFOX4, which was subsequently amended to a 2 × 2 factorial design with further randomisation to bevacizumab or placebo. A planned follow-up exploratory analysis of OS was performed. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population comprised 2034 patients (two-arm portion, n=634; 2 × 2 factorial portion, n=1400). For the whole NO16966 study population, median OS was 19.8 months in the pooled XELOX/XELOX-placebo/XELOX-bevacizumab arms vs 19.5 months in the pooled FOLFOX4/FOLFOX4-placebo/FOLFOX4-bevacizumab arms (hazard ratio 0.95 (97.5% CI 0.85-1.06)). In the pooled XELOX/XELOX-placebo arms, median OS was 19.0 vs 18.9 months in the pooled FOLFOX4/FOLFOX4-placebo arms (hazard ratio 0.95 (97.5% CI 0.83-1.09)). FOLFOX4 was associated with more grade 3/4 neutropenia/granulocytopenia and febrile neutropenia than XELOX, and XELOX with more grade 3 diarrhoea and grade 3 hand-foot syndrome than FOLFOX4. CONCLUSION: Updated survival data from study NO16966 show that XELOX is similar to FOLFOX4, confirming the primary analysis of progression-free survival. XELOX can be considered as a routine first-line treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Internet usage among women with breast cancer: an exploratory study.

An increasing number of breast cancer patients are accessing the Internet for medical information. A survey was administered to breast cancer patients and their families attending follow-up outpatient clinics in a comprehensive cancer care center to explore their frequency of Internet use, their motivation for online activity, the type of information they sought, and the perceived impact of the information they found on the Internet on their medical care. The survey was conducted over a 4-month period. A total of 107 surveys were returned. Seventy-nine of these (74%) were from patients while 28 (26%) were from family members and friends. Thirty-four of the patient responses (43%) indicated that the patient had used the Internet to look for cancer-related information. Patients who had used the Internet to access cancer-related information were significantly younger (P = 0.007), better educated (P = 0.027), and less satisfied with the amount of treatment-related information given by caregivers than those patients who had not used the Internet to access cancer-related information (P = 0.032). The majority of patient Internet users desired more information on their cancer and its treatment (91%), looked up information that was presented to them by their clinicians (66%), researched other treatment options (63%), and obtained more information on "alternative treatments" (63%). Patient Internet users generally found the cancer-related information on the Internet to be useful, and the majority discussed Internet-derived information with their health care providers and perceived that clinicians listened to such information. However, 53% were undecided about the trustworthiness of the medical information obtained via the Internet. Internet nonusers commonly lacked Internet access (53%) or were unfamiliar with the Internet (33%), but few (13%) distrusted Internet-derived information. This exploratory study underscores the need for more research in this area, specifically with the aims of identifying and verifying factors that lead patients to use the Internet and the impact of their online activities on their medical care.