Nutritional Management of Oncological Symptoms: A Comprehensive Review.

Throughout their experience of illness and during the course of treatment, a substantial proportion of cancer patients are prone to develop nutritional and/or metabolic disturbances. Additionally, cancer patients often encounter long-term side effects from therapies, which may lead to impaired digestion, nutrient absorption or bowel motility. Therefore, the preservation and maintenance of an optimal and balanced nutritional status are pivotal to achieving a better prognosis, increasing the tolerance and adherence to cancer therapies and improving the overall quality of life. In this context, personalized nutritional programs are essential for addressing conditions predisposing to weight loss, feeding difficulties, digestion problems and intestinal irregularity, with the goal of promoting adequate nutrient absorption and minimizing the detrimental effects of treatment regimens. The focus of this research is to examine the most common clinical conditions and metabolic changes that cancer patients may experience, including stomatitis, xerostomia, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, dysphagia, sub-occlusion, dysgeusia, dysosmia, anorexia, and cachexia. Furthermore, we present a pragmatic example of a multidisciplinary workflow that incorporates customized recipes tailored to individual clinical scenarios, all while maintaining the hedonic value of the meals.

Preoperative treatments in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer: Current evidence and new perspectives.

Surgery is the only curative treatment for non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but less than 20 % of patients present a resectable disease at diagnosis. Treatment strategies and disease definition for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) vary in the different cancer centres. Preoperative chemotherapy (CT) is the standard of care for both BRPC and LAPC patients, however literature data are still controversial concerning the type, dose and duration of the different CT regimens, as well as regarding the integration of radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiation (CRT) in the therapeutic algorithm. In this unsettled debate, we aimed at focusing on the therapeutic regimens currently in use and relative literature data, to report international trials comparing the available therapeutic options or explore the introduction of new pharmacological agents, and to analyse possible new scenarios in microenvironment evaluation before and after neoadjuvant therapies or in patients' selection at a molecular level.

Multidisciplinary Team Meeting Proposal and Final Therapeutic Choice in Early Breast Cancer: Is There an Agreement?

Background: A multidisciplinary team meeting (MDM) approach in breast cancer (BC) management is a standard of care. One of the roles of MDMs is to identify the best diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for patients (pts) with new diagnosis of early BC. The purpose of this study was to define whether there was an agreement between the planned program (i.e., MDMs-based decision) and that actually applied. In addition, the study explored factors associated with discordance. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of a consecutive series of 291 patients with new diagnosis of early BC, discussed at MDMs at the University Hospital of Udine (Italy), from January 2017 to June 2018. The association between clinico-biological factors and discordance between what was decided during the MDMs and what was consequently applied by the oncologist was explored through uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Results: The median age was 62 years (range 27-88 years). Among invasive early BC patients, the most frequent phenotype was luminal A (38%), followed by luminal B (33%), HER2-positive (12%), and triple-negative (5%). In situ carcinoma (DCIS) represented 12% of cases. The median time from MDM discussion to first oncologic examination was 2 weeks. The rate of discordance between MDM-based decision and final choice, during a face-to-face consultation with the oncologist, was 15.8% (46/291). The most frequent reason for changing the MDM-based program was clinical decision (87%). Follow-up was preferred to the chemotherapy (CT) proposed within the MDMs in 15% of cases, and to the endocrine therapy (ET) in 39% of cases (among these, 44.5% had a diagnosis of DCIS). Therapeutic change from sequential CT-ET to ET alone was chosen in 16/46 pts (35%): among these patients, seven had a luminal B disease and six had an HER2-positive disease. On univariate analysis, factors associated with discordance were values of Ki-67 14%-30% (OR 3.91; 95% CI 1.19-12.9), age >70 years (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.28-4.63), housewife/retired status (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.14-4.85), polypharmacy (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.02-3.72), postmenopausal status (OR 4.15; 95% CI 1.58-10.9), and high Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.09-1.57). The association with marital status, educational level, alcohol and smoke habits, presence of a caregiver, parity, grading, histotype and phenotype, and stage was not statistically significant. On multivariate analysis, only Ki-67 value maintained its statistical significance. Conclusion: The results of our study could be useful for enhancing the role of MDMs in the clinical decision-making process in early BC.