Psychosocial effects of cancer cachexia: a systematic literature search and qualitative analysis

CONTEXT

Cancer cachexia is debilitating and affects most patients with advanced cancer. Because treatment options are poor, the psychosocial effects of cancer cachexia always should be assessed and psychosocial support provided.

OBJECTIVES

To review the existing evidence of psychosocial effects of cancer cachexia with the aim of identifying factors that might be modified to improve outcomes.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic literature search in MEDLINE and Embase. The search string included key words for the topics "advanced cancer," "cancer cachexia," and "psychosocial effects." Publications were selected by two reviewers. The search was complemented by a hand search.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were included. The available information revealed mechanisms leading to, various presentations of, and coping strategies for psychosocial effects of cancer cachexia in both patients and their carers. Not all those affected manage the effects of the condition constructively. A number of clinically important adverse reactions have been identified. The main causes for negative psychosocial effects are a lack of knowledge of the irreversible nature of cancer cachexia and unsuccessful attempts to increase body weight with altered patterns of nutritional intake. Depending on patients' and their carers' coping resources, psychosocial effects may escalate or decrease. Early identification of psychosocial effects creates the potential for psychosocial interventions that improve the quality of life of those affected. Our analysis engendered a broader conceptualization of the psychosocial effects of cancer cachexia, leading to a number of suggestions for psychosocial interventions with the potential for providing relief.

CONCLUSION

The concept of psychosocial effects in cancer cachexia has the potential to sensitize health care professionals to cachexia-related problems and inform their clinical management of the condition.

When Eating Becomes Torturous: Understanding Nutrition-Related Cancer Treatment Side Effects among Individuals with Cancer and Their Caregivers

Individuals living with cancer often experience multiple nutrition-related side effects from cancer treatment, including changes in taste and smell, nausea, diarrhea, loss of appetite, and pain during eating. These side effects can profoundly impact nutritional status and quality of life. The purpose of this study was to explore experiences with nutrition-related cancer treatment side effects among cancer patients and their family caregivers, the way they manage such side effects, and the resulting changes in food preferences and behaviors. Structured surveys and in-depth interviews were conducted. Interviews focused on the presence and management of treatment side effects, how those changes influenced food preferences, and the extent to which they interfered with quality of life. Most patients (72%) reported treatment side effects; 61% reported that these side effects impacted their eating and drinking. Common side effects included fatigue (58%), dry mouth (30%), nausea (24%), constipation (20%) and diarrhea (20%). Six overarching qualitative themes were identified: Spiral of side effects; Pain of eating; Burden of eating; Loss of taste/change in taste; Symptom management; and Solutions. The authors conclude with implications for food and nutrition practice—moving beyond traditional recommendations of what to eat or avoid—to consider the overall patient and caregiver experience.

Potential Measurement Properties of a Questionnaire for Eating-Related Distress Among Advanced Cancer Patients With Cachexia: Preliminary Findings of Reliability and Validity Analysis

BACKGROUND

There are no validated tools for measuring eating-related distress among patients with advanced cancer. The aim of the study was to investigate the potential measurement properties of a questionnaire for eating-related distress.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis. We performed an exploratory factor analysis for factorial validity and calculated Cronbach's α for internal consistency. Patients were classified into the 2 groups categorized using the international cachexia criteria. The total scores of each factor and all items were calculated, and comparisons were performed for known-group validity. We performed statistical correlation analysis for concurrent validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity using Pearson's product moment correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients responded. Three factors were identified. The values of Cronbach's α were 0.90, 0.89, and 0.86, respectively. Patients were classified into 2 groups: Non-cachexia/Pre-cachexia (n = 57) and Cachexia/Refractory cachexia (n = 83). Significant differences were observed in the total scores of each factor and all items: (factor 1) 7.5 vs. 11.0, p < 0.001; (factor 2) 8.0 vs. 13.0, p < 0.001; (factor 3) 5.0 vs. 10.0, p < 0.001; (all items) 20.0 vs. 35.0, p < 0.001, respectively. The total scores of each factor and all items significantly correlated with the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised and the nutrition impact symptoms: 0.62 (p < 0.001) and 0.63 (p < 0.001), respectively. Scaling success rates were 100% in factor 1, 2, and 3.

CONCLUSION

The questionnaire appears to be useful. Eating-related distress in patients with advanced cancer had 3 factors.