Echium oil is not protective against weight loss in head and neck cancer patients undergoing curative radio(chemo)therapy: a randomised-controlled trial

Prevention of weight loss in patients with head and neck cancer in ongoing radiation or chemoradiation therapy-A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD4202345740) identified and synthesised existing evidence on nutrition interventions performed by healthcare professionals, and the contents of the interventions that prevented weight loss in patients with HNC undergoing RT/CRT.

METHODS

We included quantitative studies. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched, and the outcomes of interest were weight change and nutritional status. A narrative synthesis was undertaken to elaborate on the findings across the included studies. Furthermore, a meta-analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies were identified. Most focused on the effect of oral nutritional supplements (ONS) and individualised nutrition counselling (INC). A beneficial effect of ONS combined with weekly INC were identified, and compliance, management of adverse effects, involvement of family as well as the knowledge and approach of the healthcare professionals were identified as key elements when supporting the management of nutrition intake in HNC patients during RT/CRT. The meta-analysis showed a non-significant effect of ONS, yet significant when combined with INC, and no overall effect of INC, but significant effect in the RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest an optimal effect of ONS combined with weekly INC, requiring a focus on enhancing compliance as well as support from a multidisciplinary team to manage adverse treatment effects. Compliance must be emphasised to provide maximum support to the patient, as well as focus on the knowledge of the health care professionals performing the intervention. Further research on strategies to enhance patient compliance and involvement is needed.

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.

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.

Appetite and dietary intake endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 2 of the cachexia endpoints series

There is no consensus on the optimal endpoint(s) in cancer cachexia trials. Endpoint variation is an obstacle when comparing interventions and their clinical value. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and evaluate endpoints used to assess appetite and dietary intake in cancer cachexia clinical trials. A search for studies published from 1 January 1990 until 2 June 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible studies examined cancer cachexia treatment versus a comparator in adults with assessments of appetite and/or dietary intake as study endpoints, a sample size ≥40 and an intervention lasting ≥14 days. Reporting was in line with PRISMA guidance, and a protocol was published in PROSPERO (2022 CRD42022276710). This review is part of a series of systematic reviews examining cachexia endpoints. Of the 5975 articles identified, 116 were eligible for the wider review series and 80 specifically examined endpoints of appetite (65 studies) and/or dietary intake (21 studies). Six trials assessed both appetite and dietary intake. Appetite was the primary outcome in 15 trials and dietary intake in 7 trials. Median sample size was 101 patients (range 40-628). Forty-nine studies included multiple primary tumour sites, while 31 studies involved single primary tumour sites (15 gastrointestinal, 7 lung, 7 head and neck and 2 female reproductive organs). The most frequently reported appetite endpoints were visual analogue scale (VAS) and numerical rating scale (NRS) (40%). The appetite item from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) C30/C15 PAL (38%) and the appetite question from North Central Cancer Treatment Group anorexia questionnaire (17%) were also frequently applied. Of the studies that assessed dietary intake, 13 (62%) used food records (prospective registrations) and 10 (48%) used retrospective methods (24-h recall or dietary history). For VAS/NRS, a mean change of 1.3 corresponded to Hedge's g of 0.5 and can be considered a moderate change. For food records, a mean change of 231 kcal/day or 11 g of protein/day corresponded to a moderate change. Choice of endpoint in cachexia trials will depend on factors pertinent to the trial to be conducted. Nevertheless, from trials assessed and available literature, NRS or EORTC QLQ C30/C15 PAL seems suitable for appetite assessments. Appetite and dietary intake endpoints are rarely used as primary outcomes in cancer cachexia. Dietary intake assessments were used mainly to monitor compliance and are not validated in cachexia populations. Given the importance to cachexia studies, dietary intake endpoints must be validated before they are used as endpoints in clinical trials.

Assessment of Integrative Therapeutic Methods for Improving the Quality of Life and Functioning in Cancer Patients-A Systematic Review

Background: Cancer rehabilitation represents a series of measures adopted for the recovery of psychological, emotional, social, and financial functioning in the case of cancer patients. The purpose of this study is to identify the main elements of therapeutic management in the field of medical rehabilitation, as well as integrative, complementary medicine and holistic approaches that can be performed on the oncological patient. Methods: This systematic literature review follows the methodology outlined in the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis" ("PRISMA") statement, which is an internationally recognized and widely accepted standard. Results: Active rehabilitative therapies offer therapeutic options for improving the functioning and quality of life of oncological patients; these therapies comprehensively address both the physical and psychological aspects of the disease. This review also includes the latest novelties and nanotechnologies applied in oncological rehabilitation, for example, drugs (or supplements) inspired by nature. Conclusions: Physical and rehabilitation medicine, mostly using stimulating therapeutic methods, was recently added to the list of contraindications in the management of oncological patients, both as an approach to the pathological concept itself and as an approach to the main clinical consequences and functional aspects of oncological therapies. Integrative, complementary medicine presents an important therapeutic resource in the case of oncological patients. Advanced studies are needed in the future to further ascertain the role of these therapies.

Interventions to improve quality of life in patients with head and neck cancers receiving radiation therapy: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Quality of life (QOL) is impaired in patients with head and neck cancers (HNC) due to illness and treatment-associated morbidity. Although there is evidence from the studies on interventions' role in improving QOL receiving radiation therapy, these are not systematically synthesised. In this scoping review, we searched and synthesised the evidence on interventions to improve the QOL and its impact among patients with HNCs.

METHODS

This scoping review was conducted using the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, and the extensions suggested by Levac et al. were incorporated. Two reviewers independently searched four electronic databases using key thesaurus and free-text terms, and the data was extracted, tabulated, synthesised and reported as categories.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine papers reported various interventions of diverse nature such as pharmacological, physical, nutritional, complementary and alternative therapies, psychosocial, oral care related, laser and photobiomodulation therapies, rehabilitative, educational, technology-based, surgical, device-related and nurse lead interventions. Most studies reported clinically meaningful impact of interventions on QOL, although the outcome differences were often statistically insignificant. Few studies reported a combination of interventions to address the multidimensional concerns faced by patients with HNCs. None of the studies examined the impact of interventions on QOL among long-term survivors of HNCs.

CONCLUSION

As QOL concerns in patients with HNCs are multifaceted, more extensive studies with complex multi-component interventions and robust research designs are warranted.

Physical function endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 1 of the cachexia endpoints series

In cancer cachexia trials, measures of physical function are commonly used as endpoints. For drug trials to obtain regulatory approval, efficacy in physical function endpoints may be needed alongside other measures. However, it is not clear which physical function endpoints should be used. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the frequency and diversity of physical function endpoints in cancer cachexia trials. Following a comprehensive electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane (1990-2021), records were retrieved. Eligible trials met the following criteria: adults (≥18 years), controlled design, more than 40 participants, use of a cachexia intervention for more than 14 days and use of a physical function endpoint. Physical function measures were classified as an objective measure (hand grip strength [HGS], stair climb power [SCP], timed up and go [TUG] test, 6-min walking test [6MWT] and short physical performance battery [SPPB]), clinician assessment of function (Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS] or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status [ECOG-PS]) or patient-reported outcomes (physical function subscale of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires [EORTC QLQ-C30 or C15]). Data extraction was performed using Covidence and followed PRISMA guidance (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022276710). A total of 5975 potential studies were examined and 71 were eligible. Pharmacological interventions were assessed in 38 trials (54%). Of these, 11 (29%, n = 1184) examined megestrol and 5 (13%, n = 1928) examined anamorelin; nutritional interventions were assessed in 21 trials (30%); and exercise-based interventions were assessed in 6 trials (8%). The remaining six trials (8%) assessed multimodal interventions. Among the objective measures of physical function (assessed as primary or secondary endpoints), HGS was most commonly examined (33 trials, n = 5081) and demonstrated a statistically significant finding in 12 (36%) trials (n = 2091). The 6MWT was assessed in 12 trials (n = 1074) and was statistically significant in 4 (33%) trials (n = 403), whereas SCP, TUG and SPPB were each assessed in 3 trials. KPS was more commonly assessed than the newer ECOG-PS (16 vs. 9 trials), and patient-reported EORTC QLQ-C30 physical function was reported in 25 trials. HGS is the most commonly used physical function endpoint in cancer cachexia clinical trials. However, heterogeneity in study design, populations, intervention and endpoint selection make it difficult to comment on the optimal endpoint and how to measure this. We offer several recommendations/considerations to improve the design of future clinical trials in cancer cachexia.

A Review of Nutraceuticals in Cancer Cachexia

Cancer cachexia is largely characterized by muscle wasting and inflammation, leading to weight loss, functional impairment, poor quality of life (QOL), and reduced survival. The main barrier to therapeutic development is a lack of efficacy for improving clinically relevant outcomes, such as physical function or QOL, yet most nutraceutical studies focus on body weight. This review describes clinical and pre-clinical nutraceutical studies outside the context of complex nutritional and/or multimodal interventions, in the setting of cancer cachexia, in view of considerations for future clinical trial design. Clinical studies mostly utilized polyunsaturated fatty acids or amino acids/derivatives, and they primarily focused on body weight and, secondarily, on muscle mass and/or QOL. The few studies that measured physical function almost exclusively utilized handgrip strength with, predominantly, no time and/or group effect. Preclinical studies focused mainly on amino acids/derivatives and polyphenols, assessing body weight, muscle mass, and occasionally physical function. While this review does not provide sufficient evidence of the efficacy of nutraceuticals for cancer cachexia, more preclinical and adequately powered clinical studies are needed, and they should focus on clinically meaningful outcomes, including physical function and QOL.

Nutrition as prevention for improved cancer health outcomes: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Among adults with cancer, malnutrition is associated with decreased treatment completion, more treatment harms and use of health care, and worse short-term survival. To inform the National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention workshop, "Nutrition as Prevention for Improved Cancer Health Outcomes," this systematic review examined the evidence for the effectiveness of providing nutrition interventions before or during cancer therapy to improve outcomes of cancer treatment.

METHODS

We identified randomized controlled trials enrolling at least 50 participants published from 2000 through July 2022. We provide a detailed evidence map for included studies and grouped studies by broad intervention and cancer types. We conducted risk of bias (RoB) and qualitative descriptions of outcomes for intervention and cancer types with a larger volume of literature.

RESULTS

From 9798 unique references, 206 randomized controlled trials from 219 publications met the inclusion criteria. Studies primarily focused on nonvitamin or mineral dietary supplements, nutrition support, and route or timing of inpatient nutrition interventions for gastrointestinal or head and neck cancers. Most studies evaluated changes in body weight or composition, adverse events from cancer treatment, length of hospital stay, or quality of life. Few studies were conducted within the United States. Among intervention and cancer types with a high volume of literature (n = 114), 49% (n = 56) were assessed as high RoB. Higher-quality studies (low or medium RoB) reported mixed results on the effect of nutrition interventions across cancer and treatment-related outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Methodological limitations of nutrition intervention studies surrounding cancer treatment impair translation of findings into clinical practice or guidelines.

Promising Sources of Plant-Derived Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review

(1) Background: Polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are known for their ability to protect against numerous metabolic disorders. The consumption of oily fish is the main source of PUFAs in human nutrition and is commonly used for supplement production. However, seafood is an overexploited source that cannot be guaranteed to cover the global demands. Furthermore, it is not consumed by everyone for ecological, economic, ethical, geographical and taste reasons. The growing demand for natural dietary sources of PUFAs suggests that current nutritional sources are insufficient to meet global needs, and less and less will be. Therefore, it is crucial to find sustainable sources that are acceptable to all, meeting the world population's needs. (2) Scope: This review aims to evaluate the recent evidence about alternative plant sources of essential fatty acids, focusing on long-chain omega-3 (n-3) PUFAs. (3) Method: A structured search was performed on the PubMed search engine to select available human data from interventional studies using omega-3 fatty acids of non-animal origin. (4) Results: Several promising sources have emerged from the literature, such as algae, microorganisms, plants rich in stearidonic acid and GM plants. However, the costs, acceptance and adequate formulation deserve further investigation.

Targeting cancer cachexia: Molecular mechanisms and clinical study

Cancer cachexia is a complex systemic catabolism syndrome characterized by muscle wasting. It affects multiple distant organs and their crosstalk with cancer constitute cancer cachexia environment. During the occurrence and progression of cancer cachexia, interactions of aberrant organs with cancer cells or other organs in a cancer cachexia environment initiate a cascade of stress reactions and destroy multiple organs including the liver, heart, pancreas, intestine, brain, bone, and spleen in metabolism, neural, and immune homeostasis. The role of involved organs turned from inhibiting tumor growth into promoting cancer cachexia in cancer progression. In this review, we depicted the complicated relationship of cancer cachexia with the metabolism, neural, and immune homeostasis imbalance in multiple organs in a cancer cachexia environment and summarized the treatment progress in recent years. And we discussed the molecular mechanism and clinical study of cancer cachexia from the perspective of multiple organs metabolic, neurological, and immunological abnormalities. Updated understanding of cancer cachexia might facilitate the exploration of biomarkers and novel therapeutic targets of cancer cachexia.

Omega-3 polyunsaterated fatty acids improve quality of life and survival, but not body weight in cancer cachexia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials

Several clinical trials have reported that patients with cancer cachexia can benefit from n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFAs) supplements; however, the results have been conflicting. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of n-3 PUFAs on cancer cachexia. A search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify the included randomized controlled trials. Trials including patients with cancer cachexia who were administered a course of n-3 PUFAs were included. A meta-analysis on body weight, lean body weight, proinflammatory factors, quality of life, and median duration of survival was conducted. A total of 12 randomized controlled trials with 1184 patients were included. No effect on body weight (standard mean difference [SMD], 0.10; 95% CI, -0.06 to 0.26; P = .236), lean body weight (SMD, -0.17; 95% CI, -0.36 to 0.03, P = .095), or proinflammatory factors (interleukin-6: SMD, 0.31; 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.75; P = .18; tumor necrosis factor-α: SMD, -0.85; 95% CI, -2.39 to 0.69; P = .28) was observed. The use of n-3 PUFAs was associated with a significant improvement in quality of life (SMD, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.01-1.40; P = .048) and median duration of survival (median survival ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19; P = .014). For patients with cancer cachexia, our meta-analysis indicated that n-3 PUFAs improved quality of life and survival, but not body weight.

Multi-targeted therapy of cancer by omega-3 fatty acids-an update

Low in dietary ω3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) consumption has been associated with increased incidence of cancers. Many basic and clinical studies have been conducted over the last several decades. We previously reviewed multi-targeted therapy of cancer by omega-3 fatty acids in 2008, and since hundreds of new clinical trials are being conducted to validate the effectiveness of ω3 PUFA in cancer therapy. Because of the availability of such large amount of clinical trial data, in this update we summarize clinical data, sort out trials that show promising results, and discuss potential mechanism(s) responsible for the clinical outcomes. It appears that ω3 PUFA mainly affects cancer-associated symptoms, namely cachexia, inflammation, neuropathy, post operative complications and quality of life. Mechanisms responsible for these effects are possible regulation of skeletal muscle protein turnover, inflammatory response and neuron cell survive by ω3 PUFA.

Role of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the Management of Cancer Cachexia

Cancer cachexia is an important concern in cancer patients in view of advanced stage at presentation. The treatment goal for cachexia is the reversal of the loss of body weight and muscle mass with a variety of pharmacological agents. Various treatment guidelines focus on patients with advanced cancer who are likely to suffer from refractory cachexia. There is a paucity of data on research directed to cancer cachexia on cancer patients. Complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) are widely use at some or other point of time by the majority of cancer patients in spite of little or no evidence to support that. There are many CAM which have been tried in different set up for cancer cachexia. These medicines are well accepted in view of lesser side effects and easy to use. There is a need for more randomized controlled trials with larger sample size with longer follow-up to generate more evidence in support to the use of CAM in cancer and cancer cachexia.

Immunonutrition in head and neck cancer: Systematic review and metanalysis of its clinical and nutritional effects

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A systematic review was conducted to assess the effects of glutamine, arginine and omega-3 supplementation on the tolerance to treatment, nutritional status and immune function of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

Randomized clinical trials were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, OpenGrey and Proquest. Tolerance to treatment, nutritional status, immune function and mortality rate were the primary outcomes investigated. Secondary outcomes comprised functional status, weight loss and body composition. Risk of bias of individual studies and the overall quality of the evidence were assessed using the Cochrane and the GRADE tools, respectively.

RESULTS

Nineteen articles met the inclusion criteria and nine were included in the meta-analyses, which assessed mucositis severity, weight loss and handgrip strength. Ten studies were evaluated as high risk of bias. Glutamine supplementation has significantly reduced the risk of grade 2-4 mucositis (RR: 0.76, IC95% [0.63; 0.92], P = 0.006, I² = 0%; P = 0.792; 4 studies). Omega-3 supplementation did not show statistically significant results on weight loss (SMD: -0.042, 95% CI [-0.322; 0.238], P = 0.769, I² = 33.4%; P = 0.212; 4 studies). The overall quality of the evidence ranged from low to very low.

CONCLUSIONS

These results must be interpreted with caution due to differences between supplementations regimen, lack of methodological rigor in most studies and due to the possible role of glutamine in tumor metabolism. Studies focused on elucidating the contribution of each immunonutrient to HNC patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy deserve further investigation.

Plant-based stearidonic acid as sustainable source of omega-3 fatty acid with functional outcomes on human health

Dietary omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 LC-PUFA) like eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA, 20:5n-3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22:6n-3) are known to be potent biological regulators with therapeutic and preventive effects on human health. Many global health organizations have recommended consuming marine based omega-3 sources for neonatal brain development and reducing the risk of various chronic diseases. However, due to concerns regarding the origin, sustainable supply and safety of the marine sources, alternative n-3 PUFA sources are being explored. Recently, plant-based omega-3 sources are gaining much importance because of their sustainable supply and dietary acceptance. α-linolenic acid (ALA, 18:3n-3) rich seed oils are the major omega-3 fatty acid source available for human consumption. But, efficiency of conversion of ALA to n-3 LC-PUFAs in humans is limited due to a rate-limiting step in the n-3 pathway catalyzed by Δ6-desaturase. Botanical stearidonic acid (SDA, 18:4n-3) rich oils are emerging as a sustainable omega-3 source with efficient conversion rate to n-3 LC-PUFA especially to EPA, as it bypasses the Δ6-desaturase rate limiting step. Several recent studies have identified the major plant sources of SDA and explored its potential health benefits and preventive roles in inflammation, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. This systematic review summarizes the current state of knowledge on the sources, nutraceutical roles, food-based applications and the future perspectives of botanical SDA.

Should omega-3 fatty acids be used for adjuvant treatment of cancer cachexia?

OBJECTIVES

Cancer cachexia is characterised by a progressive loss of muscle, resulting in functional impairment and shorter survival. Therefore, omega-3 has been studied for its role as an anti-cachectic therapy. This systematic review identified studies published on use of omega-3 in cancer cachexia in order to examine the potential benefit.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature using PubMed and B-on databases was conducted to identify clinical trials published between 2000 and 2015, to evaluate the effect of n-3 PUFAs on nutritional features and Quality of Life in cancer cachexia. Of 140 publications, 7 were selected on the basis of their methodological quality, according to the Delphi List. The collected data was summarized and written in text format and in tables.

RESULTS

Only one study, made in pre-cachectic population, show statistically and clinically positive intervention. No benefits were observed with the 4 g EPA/day, but a potentially clinically relevant treatment effect with 2 g EPA/day. Lung tumours showed the highest CRP levels and while the weight of patients with gastrointestinal cancer increased significantly, patients with lung cancer showed no significant response.

CONCLUSIONS

Future cachexia trials would likely benefit from studying a single tumour type with earlier stage disease, with probably different dosage depending on the cancer type and its inflammatory profile.

Oral Mucositis: Melatonin Gel an Effective New Treatment

The current treatment for cervico-facial cancer involves radio and/or chemotherapy. Unfortunately, cancer therapies can lead to local and systemic complications such as mucositis, which is the most common dose-dependent complication in the oral cavity and gastrointestinal tract. Mucositis can cause a considerably reduced quality of life in cancer patients already suffering from physical and psychological exhaustion. However, the role of melatonin in the treatment of mucositis has recently been investigated, and offers an effective alternative therapy in the prevention and/or management of radio and/or chemotherapy-induced mucositis. This review focuses on the pathobiology and management of mucositis in order to improve the quality of cancer patients' lives.