SEOM clinical guidelines for cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome (2023).

Cancer-related anorexia-cachexia syndrome (CACS) is a debilitating condition afflicting up to 80% of advanced-stage cancer patients. Characterized by progressive weight loss, muscle wasting, and metabolic abnormalities, CACS significantly compromises patients' quality of life and treatment outcomes. This comprehensive review navigates through its intricate physiopathology, elucidating its stages and diagnostic methodologies. CACS manifests in three distinct stages: pre-cachexia, established cachexia, and refractory cachexia. Early detection is pivotal for effective intervention and is facilitated by screening tools, complemented by nutritional assessments and professional evaluations. The diagnostic process unravels the complex interplay of metabolic dysregulation and tumor-induced factors contributing to CACS. Management strategies, tailored to individual patient profiles, encompass a spectrum of nutritional interventions. These include dietary counseling, oral nutritional supplements, and, when necessary, enteral nutrition and a judicious use of parenteral nutrition. Specific recommendations for caloric intake, protein requirements, and essential nutrients address the unique challenges posed by CACS. While pharmacological agents like megestrol acetate may be considered, their use requires careful evaluation of potential risks. At its core, this review underscores the imperative for a holistic and personalized approach to managing CACS, integrating nutritional interventions and pharmacological strategies based on a nuanced understanding of patient's condition.

Overcoming barriers to opioid-induced constipation management in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a common adverse effect of opioid therapy. We aim to identify the main barriers hindering clinical recommendations implementation and propose consensus solutions to improve OIC control in cancer patients. METHODS: Following collaborative and prioritization techniques, a scientific committee generated statements addressing possible barriers to optimal OIC management (related to patients, health providers and health care system), and potential interventions to overcome these barriers. An expert panel of 36 oncologists assessed the statements to reach a consensus. RESULTS: The survey consisted of 70 statements. Consensus was reached on 12/45 items related to barriers (26.6%) and on 19/25 items about corrective interventions (76%). The panel considered that patients are unaware of the existence of a specific OIC treatment, and their information sources are highly variable and unreliable. Regarding health providers, the panel considered that the oncologists prioritize symptoms such as diarrhea, pain, anxiety, or other treatment toxicities, over constipation. Work overload and bureaucratic requirements were the main barriers related to health care system. Regarding potential interventions, best-rated proposals included specific training programs development for primary care physicians and nurses, and multiplatform informative resources development for patients and caregivers, including precisely written instructions about OIC recognition and management. Oncologists assessed positively measures aiming to improve coordination between primary care physicians and oncologists, and nursing consultations implementation. The panel considered useful the OIC treatment algorithms simplification. CONCLUSIONS: The expert panel identified the main barriers to optimal OIC management and suggested some feasible approaches to overcome these barriers.

PD-L1 testing and clinical management of newly diagnosed metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in Spain: MOREL study.

AIM: To describe the clinical management and PD-L1 testing of patients with newly diagnosed stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver mutations in Spain. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective study. RESULTS: Among 297 evaluated patients, 89.2% received systemic treatment for stage IV disease, of whom 53.6% received platinum doublet therapy, 26.8% immunotherapy as monotherapy and 14.7% immunotherapy + chemotherapy, with 9.4% receiving treatment as part of a clinical trial. Treatment was initiated 1 month after histological diagnosis, with PD-L1 test results available in most cases (92.6%). PD-L1 testing was performed in 287 patients, 95.1% by in-house tests, mostly with the 22C3 pharmDx assay. The factor most strongly associated with treatment selection was, as expected, the expression of PD-L1. CONCLUSION: PD-L1 testing is implemented in clinical practice and seems to guide treatment decisions in patients with NSCLC in Spain.