Associations of nutrition impact symptoms with dietary intake and eating-related distress in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is no definition of nutrition impact symptoms (NISs) in cancer care. Moreover, there is a lack of evidence on the associations of NISs with dietary intake and eating-related distress (ERD) in advanced cancer. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the associations of NISs with dietary intake and ERD in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: This study entailed a secondary analysis of a multicenter self-reported questionnaire designed to develop measurements that assess ERD experienced by patients. Participants evaluated their dietary intake and 19 symptoms regarded as NISs using a 10-point scale. To determine the association between dietary intake and the number of NISs with a score ≥4, estimated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the logistic regression model were calculated. Furthermore, to assess the association between ERD and the number of NISs with a score ≥4, multiple regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients were included in the analysis. The higher the number of NISs with a score ≥4, the lower the dietary intake tended to be. In the logistic regression model, significantly higher adjusted ORs than in the no NISs with a score ≥4 group were observed in the 4-6 NISs group, 7-9 NISs group, and 10 or more group (0.19 [95% CI, 0.07-0.52], p = 0.001; 0.11 [95% CI, 0.03-0.42], p = 0.001; 0.07 [95% CI, 0.01-0.36], p = 0.002, respectively). In the multiple regression analysis, the number of NISs with a score ≥4 was identified as one of the factors significantly associated with ERD. CONCLUSIONS: Having 4 or more NISs with a score ≥4 was shown to be predictive of the likelihood of reduced dietary intake. Furthermore, the higher the number of NISs with a score ≥4, the more likely the eating-related quality of life was impaired in advanced cancer.

Difficulty swallowing and food bolus obstruction in advanced cancer: association with the cachexia-related quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Swallowing disorders including difficulty swallowing and food bolus obstruction, result in reduced dietary intake-a common occurrence that leads to cachexia in patients with advanced cancer. This study examined the effects of swallowing difficulty and food bolus obstruction on cachexia-related quality of life (QOL). METHODS: This study secondarily analyzed data from a self-reported questionnaire survey of adult patients with advanced cancer at 11 palliative care services. Difficulty swallowing and food bolus obstruction were measured using the 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), whereas dietary intake and cachexia-related QOL were assessed using the Ingesta-Verbal/Visual Analog Scale and the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy Anorexia/Cachexia Subscale. A multiple logistic regression model was employed to determine the factors associated with varying degrees of difficulty swallowing and food bolus obstruction. RESULTS: Of the invited 495 patients, 378 agreed to participate (response rate 76.4%). After excluding participants with missing data, the data of 332 participants were analyzed; 26.5% had difficulty swallowing (NRS ≥1) and 28.3% had food bolus obstruction (NRS ≥1). Multivariate analysis revealed a substantial association between difficulty swallowing and food bolus obstruction and a decrease in cachexia-related QOL, regardless of performance status and the existence of cachexia. The coefficients for difficulty swallowing and food bolus obstruction were -6.34 [95% confidence interval (CI): -9.55 to -3.14, P<0.001] and -5.88 (95% CI: -8.68 to -3.09, P<0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cachexia-related QOL deteriorated as difficulty swallowing and food bolus obstruction worsened; thus, healthcare providers must diagnose and treat swallowing disorders in a timely manner to prevent progression of cachexia and improve cachexia-related QOL.

Impact of taste/smell disturbances on dietary intakes and cachexia-related quality of life in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: Taste and smell are used to enjoy meals; however, impairments of these sensory perceptions seriously impact health and eating habits. This study is aimed at investigating the impact of taste and smell disturbances on dietary intakes and cachexia-related quality of life (QOL) in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Using a self-report questionnaire, we surveyed patients with advanced cancer undergoing treatment at 11 palliative care centers. Multivariate analyses were conducted to explore the impact of taste and smell disturbances on dietary intakes and cachexia-related QOL. Dietary intakes were assessed using the Ingesta-Verbal/Visual Analog Scale, while taste and smell disturbances were assessed using an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Cachexia-related QOL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy Anorexia Cachexia Subscale (FAACT ACS). RESULTS: Overall, 378 patients provided consent to participate. After excluding patients with missing data, data were analyzed for 343 patients. Among them, 35.6% (n = 122; 95% [confidence interval (CI)] 0.28-0.38) and 20.9% (n = 72; 95% CI 0.17-0.25) experienced disturbances in taste (NRS ≥ 1) and smell (NRS ≥ 1), respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that, independent of performance status and cancer cachexia, taste and smell disturbances were significantly associated with worse dietary intakes and deteriorating FAACT ACS scores. CONCLUSION: More severe taste and smell disturbances were associated with poorer dietary intakes and cachexia-related QOL. Diagnosing and treating such disturbances may improve dietary intakes and cachexia-related QOL, regardless of performance status and cachexia.

Development and validation of questionnaires for eating-related distress among advanced cancer patients and families.

BACKGROUND: Eating-related distress (ERD) is one type of psychosocial distress among advanced cancer patients and family caregivers. Its alleviation is a key issue in palliative care; however, there is no validated tool for measuring ERD. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to validate tools for evaluating ERD among patients and family caregivers. The study consisted of a development and validation/retest phase. In the development phase, we made preliminary questionnaires for patients and family caregivers. After face validity and content validity, we performed an exploratory factor analysis and discussed the final adoption of items. In the validation/retest phase, we examined factor validity with an exploratory factor analysis. We calculated Pearson's correlation coefficients between the questionnaire for patients, the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy Anorexia Cachexia Subscale (FAACT ACS) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cachexia 24 (EORTC QLQ-CAX24) and Pearson's correlation coefficients between the questionnaire for family caregivers and the Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer (CQOLC) for concurrent validity. We calculated Cronbach's alpha coefficients (Cronbach's alpha) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for internal consistency and test-retest reliability. We performed the Mann-Whitney U test between the questionnaires and cancer cachexia based on criteria from the international consensus for known-group validity. RESULTS: In the development phase, 162 pairs of patients and family caregivers were asked to participate, and 144 patients and 106 family caregivers responded. In the validation/retest phase, 333 pairs of patients and family caregivers were asked to participate, and 234 patients and 152 family caregivers responded. Overall, 183 patients and 112 family caregivers did the retest. Seven conceptual groups were extracted for the ERD among patients and family caregivers, respectively. Patient factors 1-7 correlated with FAACT ACS (r = -0.63, -0.43, -0.55, -0.40, -0.38, -0.54, -0.38, respectively) and EORTC QLQ-CAX24 (r = 0.58, 0.40, 0.60, 0.49, 0.38, 0.59, 0.42, respectively). Family factors 1-7 correlated with CQOLC (r = -0.34, -0.30, -0.37, -0.37, -0.46, -0.42, -0.40, respectively). The values of Cronbach's alpha and ICC of each factor and all factors of patients ranged from 0.84 to 0.96 and 0.67 to 0.83, respectively. Those of each factor and all factors of family caregivers ranged from 0.84 to 0.96 and 0.63 to 0.84, respectively. The cachexia group of patients had significantly higher scores than the non-cachexia group for each factor and all factors. CONCLUSIONS: Newly developed tools for measuring ERD experienced by advanced cancer patients and family caregivers have been validated.

Anticholinergic drugs for death rattle in dying patients with cancer: multicentre prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of anticholinergics (AC) for death rattle in dying patients with cancer. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study enrolled Terminally ill adult (20 years or older) patients with cancer who developed substantial death rattle (Back score ≥2) from 23 palliative care units in Japan. AC treatment for death rattle was prescribed according to primary physician's decision. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients whose death rattle improved, which was defined as a Back score of ≤1. We compared the proportion of improved cases in patients treated with (AC group) and without (non-AC group) AC, controlling potential confounders by employing propensity score weighting. RESULTS: Of the 1896 patients enrolled, we included 196 who developed a substantial death rattle. Of these, 81 received AC. 56.8% in the AC group and 35.4% in the non-AC group had an improved death rattle at 8 hours after baseline. In the weighted analysis, AC group showed significant improvements in death rattle, with an adjusted OR of 4.47 (95% CI 2.04 to 9.78; p=0.0024). All sensitivity analyses achieved essentially the same results. In the subgroup analysis, ACs were strongly associated with death rattle improvement in men, patients with lung cancer, and type 1 death rattle (adjusted OR 5.81, 8.38 and 9.32, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity score-weighted analysis, ACs were associated with death rattle improvement in terminally ill patients with cancer who developed substantial death rattle. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN-CTR (UMIN00002545).

Beliefs and Perceptions About Parenteral Nutrition and Hydration by Advanced Cancer Patients.

Background: The beliefs and perceptions of parenteral nutrition and hydration (PNH) by advanced cancer patients have not been elucidated. Objectives: To clarify their beliefs and perceptions and to explore the relationships between their beliefs and perceptions and cachexia stages. Design/setting/subjects: A questionnaire survey of advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care across Japan. Measurements: We asked patients to answer 15 items regarding their beliefs and perceptions of PNH. Frequencies were calculated for the patient characteristics and survey parameters. Comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test. We conducted a factor analysis and a multiple logistic regression analysis to identify the independent factors affecting cancer cachexia stages. Results: Among 495 patients, 378 responded. Due to missing data, 357 remained in the frequency distribution analysis, and 344 were classified into the noncachexia group (n = 174) and cachexia group (n = 170). Approximately 60% thought that PNH were beneficial. Approximately 70% considered PNH a standard medical practice. Approximately 70% did not feel that they received a sufficient explanation. There were no significant differences in any items between the two groups. We extracted four conceptual groups. The concept of "Belief that PNH are harmful" was identified as an independent factor [odds ratio 2.57 (95% confidence intervals 1.10-6.01), p = 0.030]. Conclusion: More than half of the patients thought that PNH were beneficial and standard medical practices with or without cancer cachexia. The negative perception of PNH decreased in patients with cancer cachexia.

Risk factors of sudden unexpected death in patients with advanced cancer near the end of life.

BACKGROUND: The definition of sudden unexpected death (SUD) in patients with advanced cancer near the end of life (EOL) was unclear. METHODS: This study was conducted as a single-center retrospective analysis. We analyzed 1,282 patients who died of advanced cancer from August 2011 to August 2019 retrospectively. We divided into patients who died within 24 h after the acute change of general condition or others and analyzed risk factors by a multiple logistics method. The reason for SUD was found, the reason is detected by using an electronic medical record retrospectively. The risk factors in SUD were analyzed using age, sex, EOL symptom and treatment, the primary site of cancer, metastatic site of cancer, comorbidly, chemotherapy, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status. The primary endpoint was to identify the frequency and risk factors of SUD in patients with advanced cancer near the EOL. RESULTS: As a background, the median age is 73 years old, 690 males, 592 females, 227 gastroesophageal cancers, 250 biliary pancreatic cancers, 54 hepatocellular carcinomas, 189 colorectal cancer, 251 lung cancers, 71 breast cancers, 58 urological malignancies, 60 gynecological malignancies, 47 head and neck cancer, 31 hematological malignancies, and 22 sarcomas. The number of patients who died suddenly was 93 (7.2%) at EOL. In a multivariate analysis, Age (ORs 0.619), sex (ORs 1.700), patients with EOL delirium (ORs 0.483), nausea and vomiting (ORs 2.263), 1L or more infusion (ORs 3.479), EOL opioids (ORs 0.465), EOL sedations (ORs 0.339), and with cardiac comorbidity (ORs 0.345) were independent risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of patients who died suddenly was 7.2% (n = 93) at EOL. Age, sex, EOL symptom, EOL treatment, and cardiac comorbidity were independent risk factors in patients with advanced cancer near the EOL. Information on these risk factors is useful to explaining their EOL in advance.

Is the 1-day surprise question a useful screening tool for predicting prognosis in patients with advanced cancer?-a multicenter prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: For cancer patients nearing death, the prediction of their prognosis by physicians is crucial. This study examined the usefulness of the 1-Day Surprise Question (1DSQ). METHODS: This study was conducted as part of a multicenter prospective observational study. The physicians answered the 1DSQ "Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 1 day?" when patients have palliative performance scale (PPS) ≤20. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the 1DSQ. Moreover, using multivariate analysis, we evaluated the characteristics of patients who died among those whose physicians answered the 1DSQ as "not surprised". RESULTS: Overall, 1,896 patients were enrolled, and 1,411 (74.4%) were analyzed between January and December 2017. Among these, 847 (60.0%) patients were placed in the "not surprised" group. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the 1DSQ were 82.0% [95% confidence interval (CI): 77.5-85.8%], 45.5% (95% CI: 44.4-46.4%), 27.4% (95% CI: 25.9-28.7%), and 91.0% (95% CI: 88.9-92.9%), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that urine output over last 12 hours <100 mL, decreased response to visual stimuli, respiration with mandibular movement, pulselessness of radial artery, and saturation of percutaneous oxygen <90% were characteristics of patients who died as predicted by the physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The 1DSQ is a helpful screening tool for identifying cancer patients with impending death.

Incidence and associated factors of sudden unexpected death in advanced cancer patients: A multicenter prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: A sudden unexpected death has significant negative impacts on patients, family caregivers, and medical staff in hospice/palliative care. This study aimed to clarify the incidence and associated factors of sudden unexpected death according to four definitions in advanced cancer patients. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study in 23 inpatient hospices/palliative care units in Japan. Advanced cancer patients aged ≥18 years who were admitted to inpatient hospices/palliative care units were included. The incidence and associated factors of sudden unexpected death were evaluated in all enrolled patients according to four definitions: (a) rapid decline death, defined as a sudden death preceded by functional decline over 1-2 days; (b) surprise death, defined if the primary responsible palliative care physician answered "yes" to the question, "Were you surprised by the timing of the death?"; (c) unexpected death, defined as a death that occurred earlier than the physicians had anticipated; and (d) performance status (PS)-defined sudden death, defined as a death that occurred within 1 week of functional status assessment with an Australia-modified Karnofsky PS ≥50. RESULTS: Among 1896 patients, the incidence of rapid decline death was the highest (30-day cumulative incidence: 16.8%, 95% CI: 14.8-19.0%), followed by surprise death (9.6%, 8.1-11.4%), unexpected death (9.0%, 7.5-10.8%), and PS-defined sudden death (6.4%, 5.2-8.0%). Male sex, liver metastasis, dyspnea, malignant skin lesion, and fluid retention were significantly associated with the occurrence of sudden unexpected death. CONCLUSION: Sudden unexpected death is not uncommon even in inpatient hospices/palliative care units, with range of 6.4-16.8% according to the different definitions.

Effects of molecular targeting agents and immune-checkpoint inhibitors in patients with advanced cancer who are near the end of life.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, the use of both molecular targeting agents (MTAs) and immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) tend to occupy important positions in systemic anticancer therapy (SACT). The objective of this study is to describe the predictors of SACT include both MTAs and ICIs near the end of life (EOL) and the effect on EOL care in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: We analyzed all patients who died of advanced cancer from August 2016 to August 2019, and we analyzed the survival time of patients who underwent anticancer agents excluded due to the loss of information about the last administration of SACT. The primary endpoint of this study was to identify predictors during the last administration of SACT near EOL. RESULTS: In a multivariate analysis, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) (ORs 33.781) was significantly related factors within 14 days of death from the last administration of SACT. Age (ORs 0.412), ECOG-PS (ORs 11.533), primary cancer site of upper GI cancers (ORs 2.205), the number of comorbidities (ORs 0.207), MTAs (ORs 3.139), and ICIs (ORs 3.592) were significantly related factors within 30 days of death. The median survival time (MST) of patients with PS 3-4 was 29 days, while that of patients with both PS 0-2 was 76 days. The prevalence rate of delirium with MTAs was 17.5%, which was significantly lower than that of patients without it (31.8%). The prevalence rate of the mean dose of opioids in patients with ICIs was 97.9 mg/day, which was significantly higher than that of patients without it (44.9 mg/day). CONCLUSIONS: Age, ECOG-PS, primary cancer site, the number of comorbidities, MTAs, and ICIs use were significant associated with SACT near EOL. Information on these factors may aid clinical decision making in referral to palliative care institutes.

Effects of enteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition on survival in patients with advanced cancer cachexia: Analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The benefits of artificial nutrition and hydration in patients with advanced cancer remain unknown. Therefore, we conducted a prospective study to evaluate effects of enteral nutrition (EN) and parenteral nutrition and hydration (PNH) on survival in palliative care units. METHODS: This study involved a secondary analysis of a multicenter cohort study. Data of primary nutritional administration routes during the first week after admission (oral intake, enteral tube feeding, parenteral nutrition, parenteral hydration, poor oral intake) were obtained. Data of averaged calorie sufficiency rate/total calorie intake [high (75% ≤ or 750 kcal/day ≤), moderate (50-75% or 500-750 kcal/day), low (25-50% or 250-500 kcal/day), very low (<25% or <250 kcal/day)] were also obtained. After investigating the implementation of artificial nutrition and hydration, participants were divided into three groups according to the nutritional administration route and calorie sufficiency rate/total calorie intake: EN, PNH, and control. We conducted time-to-event analyses using the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Patients were divided into the EN group (n = 730), PNH group (n = 190), and control group (n = 533). Differences in survival rates among the three groups were significant (Log-rank P < 0.001). Median survival times were 43.0 (95% CI 40-46), 33.0 (95% CI 29-37), and 15.0 (95% CI 14-16) days, respectively (P < 0.001). In the multivariate-adjusted model, a significantly lower risk of mortality was observed in Cox's proportional hazard model in the EN group and PNH groups (HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.37-0.49], P < 0.001; and HR 0.52 [95% CI 0.44-0.62], P < 0.001, respectively) than in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated the clinical benefits of EN and PNH for patients with advanced cancer. Nevertheless, managing symptoms to improve oral intake is essential before initiation of PNH, because EN was superior to PNH.

"3-Day Surprise Question" to predict prognosis of advanced cancer patients with impending death: Multicenter prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to clarify the efficacy of the "3-Day Surprise Question (3DSQ)" in predicting the prognosis for advanced cancer patients with impending death. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was a part of multicenter prospective observational study which investigated the dying process in advanced cancer patients in Japan. For patients with a Palliative Performance Scale ≤20, the 3DSQ "Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 3 days?" was answered by their physicians. In addition to the sensitivity and specificity of the 3DSQ, the characteristics of patients who survived longer than expected were examined via multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Among the 1896 patients enrolled, 1411 were evaluated. Among 1179 (83.6%) patients who were classified into the "Not surprised" group, 636 patients died within 3 days. Among 232 (16.4%) patients of "Yes surprised" group, 194 patients lived longer than 3 days. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the 3DSQ were 94.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92.7% to 95.8%), 26.3% (95% CI: 24.8% to 27.6%), 53.9% (95% CI: 53.0% to 54.7%), and 83.6% (95% CI: 78.7% to 87.7%), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed palpable radial artery, absent respiration with mandibular movement, SpO2 ≥ 90%, opioid administration, and no continuous deep sedation as characteristics of patients who lived longer than expected. CONCLUSIONS: The 3-Day Surprise Question can be a useful screening tool to identify advanced cancer patients with impending death.