The prognostic impact of pre-treatment cachexia in resectional surgery for oesophagogastric cancer: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Cancer cachexia is not purely an end-stage phenomenon and can influence the outcomes of patients with potentially curable disease. This review examines the effect of pre-treatment cachexia on overall survival, in patients undergoing surgical resection of oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases was conducted, from January 2000 to May 2022, to identify studies reporting the influence of cachexia on patients undergoing an oesophagogastric resection for cancer with curative intent. Meta-analyses of the primary (overall survival) and secondary (disease-free survival and postoperative mortality) outcomes were performed using random-effects modelling. Meta-regression was used to examine disease stage as a potential confounder. RESULTS: Ten non-randomized studies, comprising 7186 patients, were eligible for inclusion. The prevalence of pre-treatment cachexia was 35 per cent (95 per cent c.i.: 24-47 per cent). Pooled adjusted hazard ratios showed that cachexia was adversely associated with overall survival (HR 1.46, 95 per cent c.i.: 1.31-1.60, P < 0.001). Meta-analysis of proportions identified decreased overall survival at 1-, 3- and 5-years in cachectic cohorts. Pre-treatment cachexia was not a predictor of disease-free survival and further data are required to establish its influence on postoperative mortality. The proportion of patients with stage III/IV disease was a significant moderator of between-study heterogeneity. Cachexia may have a greater influence on overall survival in studies where more patients have a locally advanced malignancy. CONCLUSION: Pre-treatment cachexia adversely influences overall survival following resection of an oesophagogastric malignancy.

Does emergency presentation of cancer represent poor performance in primary care? Insights from a novel analysis of linked primary and secondary care data.

BACKGROUND: People diagnosed with cancer following emergency presentation have poorer short-term survival. To what extent this signifies a missed opportunity for earlier diagnosis in primary care remains unclear as little detailed data exist on the patient/general practitioner interaction beforehand. METHODS: Analysis of primary care and regional data for 1802 cancer patients from Northeast Scotland. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for patient and GP practice predictors of emergency presentation. Qualitative context coding of primary care interaction before emergency presentation. RESULTS: Emergency presentations equalled 20% (n=365). Twenty-eight per cent had no relevant prior GP contact. Of those with prior GP contact 30% were admitted while waiting to be seen in secondary care, and 19% were missed opportunities for earlier diagnosis. Associated predictors: no prior GP contact (OR=3.89; CI 95% 2.14-7.09); having lung (OR=23.24; 95% CI 7.92-68.21), colorectal (OR=18.49; CI 95% 6.60-51.82) and upper GI cancer (OR=18.97; CI 95% 6.08-59.23); ethnicity (OR=2.78; CI 95% 1.27-6.06). CONCLUSIONS: Our novel approach has revealed that emergency cancer presentation is more complex than previously thought. Patient delay, prolonged referral pathways and missed opportunities by GPs all contribute, but emergency presentation can also represent effective care. Resources should be used proportionately to raise public and GP awareness and improve post-referral pathways.

Central neural mechanisms of cancer cachexia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cachexia is a devasting syndrome which impacts a large number of patients with cancer. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the central mechanisms of cancer cachexia. In particular, it focuses on the role of the central nervous system (CNS), the melanocortin system, circulating hormones and molecules which are produced by and act on the CNS and the psychological symptoms of cancer cachexia. RECENT FINDINGS: A growing body of evidence suggests that a central mechanism of action underpins this multi-system disorder. Recent research has focused on the role of neuroinflammation that drives the sickness behaviour seen in cancer cachexia, with emphasis on the role of the hypothalamus. Melanocortin receptor antagonists are showing promise in preclinical studies. There are also new pharmacological developments to overcome the short half-life of ghrelin. GDF-15 has been identified as a core target and trials of compounds that interfere with its signalling or its central receptor are underway. SUMMARY: Understanding the central mechanisms of cancer cachexia is pivotal for enhancing treatment outcomes in patients. While emerging pharmacological interventions targeting these pathways have shown promise, further research is essential.

Body weight and composition endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 4 of the cachexia endpoints series.

Significant variation exists in the outcomes used in cancer cachexia trials, including measures of body composition, which are often selected as primary or secondary endpoints. To date, there has been no review of the most commonly selected measures or their potential sensitivity to detect changes resulting from the interventions being examined. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the frequency and diversity of body composition measures that have been used in cancer cachexia trials. MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched between January 1990 and June 2021. Eligible trials examined adults (≥18 years) who had received an intervention aiming to treat or attenuate the effects of cancer cachexia for >14 days. Trials were also of a prospective controlled design and included body weight or at least one anthropometric, bioelectrical or radiological endpoint pertaining to body composition, irrespective of the modality of intervention (e.g., pharmacological, nutritional, physical exercise and behavioural) or comparator. Trials with a sample size of <40 patients were excluded. Data extraction used Covidence software, and reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. This review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO: CRD42022276710). A total of 84 clinical trials, comprising 13 016 patients, were eligible for inclusion. Non-small-cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer were studied most frequently. The majority of trial interventions were pharmacological (52%) or nutritional (34%) in nature. The most frequently reported endpoints were assessments of body weight (68 trials, n = 11 561) followed by bioimpedance analysis (BIA)-based estimates (23 trials, n = 3140). Sixteen trials (n = 3052) included dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-based endpoints, and computed tomography (CT) body composition was included in eight trials (n = 841). Discrepancies were evident when comparing the efficacy of interventions using BIA-based estimates of lean tissue mass against radiological assessment modalities. Body weight, BIA and DEXA-based endpoints have been most frequently used in cancer cachexia trials. Although the optimal endpoints cannot be determined from this review, body weight, alongside measurements from radiological body composition analysis, would seem appropriate. The choice of radiological modality is likely to be dependent on the trial setting, population and intervention in question. CT and magnetic resonance imaging, which have the ability to accurately discriminate tissue types, are likely to be more sensitive and provide greater detail. Endpoints are of particular importance when aligned with the intervention's mechanism of action and/or intended patient benefit.

Biomarker endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 5 of the cachexia endpoint series.

Regulatory agencies require evidence that endpoints correlate with clinical benefit before they can be used to approve drugs. Biomarkers are often considered surrogate endpoints. In cancer cachexia trials, the measurement of biomarkers features frequently. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the frequency and diversity of biomarker endpoints in cancer cachexia trials. A comprehensive electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane (1990-2023) was completed. Eligible trials met the following criteria: adults (≥18 years), prospective design, more than 40 participants, use of a cachexia intervention for more than 14 days and use of a biomarker(s) as an endpoint. Biomarkers were defined as any objective measure that was assayed from a body fluid, including scoring systems based on these assays. Routine haematology and biochemistry to monitor intervention toxicity were not considered. Data extraction was performed using Covidence, and reporting followed PRISMA guidance (PROSPERO: CRD42022276710). A total of 5975 studies were assessed, of which 52 trials (total participants = 6522) included biomarkers as endpoints. Most studies (n = 29, 55.7%) included a variety of cancer types. Pharmacological interventions (n = 27, 51.9%) were most evaluated, followed by nutritional interventions (n = 20, 38.4%). Ninety-nine different biomarkers were used across the trials, and of these, 96 were assayed from blood. Albumin (n = 29, 55.8%) was assessed most often, followed by C-reactive protein (n = 22, 42.3%), interleukin-6 (n = 16, 30.8%) and tumour necrosis factor-α (n = 14, 26.9%), the latter being the only biomarker that was used to guide sample size calculations. Biomarkers were explicitly listed as a primary outcome in six trials. In total, 12 biomarkers (12.1% of 99) were used in six trials or more. Insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3) and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels both increased significantly in all three trials in which they were both used. This corresponded with a primary outcome, lean body mass, and was related to the pharmacological mechanism. Biomarkers were predominately used as exploratory rather than primary endpoints. The most commonly used biomarker, albumin, was limited by its lack of responsiveness to nutritional intervention. For a biomarker to be responsive to change, it must be related to the mechanism of action of the intervention and/or the underlying cachexia process that is modified by the intervention, as seen with IGFBP-3, IGF-1 and anamorelin. To reach regulatory approval as an endpoint, the relationship between the biomarker and clinical benefit must be clarified.

Trampoline-associated injuries are more common in children in spring.

AIMS: Trampoline use is a popular pastime amongst children in New Zealand, and has many advantages for child development. However, recent reports claim that trampoline-associated injuries are still highly prevalent. In order to help prevent these injuries in the future, this study aims to provide more up-to-date epidemiological information in children, with emphasis on the time of year that injuries most commonly occur. METHODS: A retrospective review was carried out utilising a prospective maintained trauma database. The database was searched electronically for injuries involving trampolines in children aged 0-15 years. Patient demographics and information regarding month of injury, injury type and management were extracted. RESULTS: There were 344 admissions to hospital for trampoline-related injuries between June 2000 and January 2015. Injuries were uncommon in winter, but rose in spring and summer. Fracture of the radius and/or ulna was the most common injury (34.0%), followed by humeral fracture (32.0%). CONCLUSION: The peak incidence of trampoline-related injuries occurred around the beginning of spring daylight savings time each year. This could therefore prove an opportune time to remind children and parents about trampoline safety at the same time as daylight savings reminders.