ABSTRACT
Background: Despite the strong declining trends in incidence and mortality over the last decades, gastric cancer (GC) is still burdened with high mortality, even in high-income countries. To improve GC prognosis, several guidelines have been increasingly published with indications about the most appropriate GC management. The Italian Society of Digestive System Pathology (SIPAD) and Gastric Cancer Italian Research Group (GIRCG) designed a survey for both surgeons and patients with the purpose of evaluating the degree of application and adherence to guidelines in GC management in Italy. Materials and Methods: Between January and May 2022, a questionnaire has been administered to a sample of Italian surgeons and, in a simplified version, to members of the Patient Association "Vivere Senza Stomaco" (patients surgically treated for GC between 2008 and 2021) to investigate the diagnosis, staging, and treatment issues. Results: The survey has been completed by 125 surgeons and 125 patients. Abdominal CT with gastric hydro-distension before treatment was not widespread in both groups (47% and 42%, respectively). The rate of surgeons stating that they do not usually perform minimally invasive gastrectomy was 15%, but the rate of patients who underwent a minimally invasive approach was 22% (between 2011 and 2022). The percentage of surgeons declaring to perform extended lymphadenectomy (>D2) was 97%, although a limited lymph node dissection rate was observed in about 35% of patients. Conclusions: This survey shows several important discrepancies from surgical attitudes declared by surgeons and real data derived from the reports available to the patients, suggesting heterogeneous management in clinical practice and, thus, a not rigorous adherence to the guidelines.
ABSTRACT
Nutritional intervention is an essential part of cancer treatments. Research and clinical evidence in cancer have shown that nutritional support can reduce length of hospitalisation, diminish treatment-related toxicity, and improve nutrient intake, quality of life, and physical function. Nutritional intervention can improve outcomes and help patients in the successful completion of oncological treatments by preventing malnutrition. Malnutrition is a very common hallmark in patients with cancers. Almost one-fourth of cancer patients are at risk of dying because of the consequences of malnutrition, rather than cancer itself. Patients with digestive cancers are at higher risk of suffering malnutrition due to the gastrointestinal impairment caused by their disease. They are at high nutritional risk by definition, yet the majority of them have insufficient or null access to nutritional intervention.Inadequate resources are dedicated to implementing nutritional services in Europe. Universal access to nutritional support for digestive cancer patients is not a reality in many European countries. To change this situation, health systems should invest in qualified staff to reinforce or create nutritional teams' experts in digestive cancer treatments. We aim to share the patient community's perspective on the status and the importance of nutritional intervention. This is an advocacy manuscript presenting data on the topic and analysing the current situations and the challenges for nutrition in digestive cancers. It highlights the importance of integrative nutrition in the treatment of digestive cancers and advocates for equitable and universal access to nutritional intervention for all patients.
Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Neoplasms , Malnutrition , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/complications , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Malnutrition/etiology , Malnutrition/prevention & control , Nutrition Assessment , Nutritional Status , Nutritional Support , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
Psychosocial morbidity can have negative consequences for cancer patients, including maladaptive coping, poor treatment adherence, and lower quality of life. Evidence shows that psychosocial interventions can positively impact quality of life, as well as symptoms and side effects; however, they are not always offered to patients who might benefit from them. These guidelines were produced by a multidisciplinary panel of 16 experts, including patients, following GRADE methodology. The panel framed clinical questions and voted on outcomes to investigate. Studies identified by rigorous search strategies were assessed to rate certainty of evidence, and recommendations were formulated by the panel. Although the quality of the evidence found was generally moderate, interventions could be recommended aimed at improving patient information, communication with healthcare professionals and involvement in decision-making; detecting and managing patient psychosocial needs, particularly with non-pharmacological therapy; and supporting families of patients with advanced cancer. The role of nurses as providers of information and psychosocial care is stressed. Most recommended interventions do not appear to necessitate new services or infrastructures, and therefore do not require allocation of additional resources, but predominantly involve changes in clinical staff behavior and/or ward organization. Patients should be made aware of psychosocial care standards so that they can expect to receive them.