RESUMO
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.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Although diabetes mellitus (DM) is recognized as a risk factor for chemotherapy-induced neurotoxicity, its true impact on intensity and time course of peripheral neuropathy is still unclear. The goal was to analyze the relevance of preexisting DM to weekly paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy (PIPN). METHODS: We performed a retrospective case-control study (1:2) including a total of 129 patients with breast cancer (43 with DM and 86 controls) treated with single-agent weekly paclitaxel (wP). RESULTS: Compared with controls, patients with DM treated with wP experienced PIPN more frequently (74.4% vs 58.4%; P=.016) and with higher severity (grade 2-3: 51.2% vs 27.7%; P=.014). A significant delay in PIPN resolution was observed in women with DM (P=.001) and, in a multivariate analysis, DM was the only independent predictor for delayed recovery (hazard ratio [HR], 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05-0.55; P=.003). After 2 years, 68.7% of patients with DM (vs 29.2% of women without DM) still experienced PIPN, which was functionally significant (grade 2-3) in 18.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly more dose delays and reductions because of PIPN occurred in patients with DM. Preexisting DM associates with long-lasting significant PIPN in patients treated with wP. Benefits and risks of long-term significant PIPN should be carefully balanced in patients with DM before starting wP chemotherapy.