Search

Introduction: Lung cancer (LC) is highly prevalent worldwide, with elevated mortality. In this population, taste and smell alterations (TSAs) are frequent but overlooked symptoms. The absence of effective therapeutic strategies and evidence-based guidelines constrain TSAs' early recognition, prevention and treatment (Tx), promoting cancer-related malnutrition and jeopardizing survival outcomes and quality of life., Objectives: To systematically review the literature on TSAs in LC patients, understand the physiopathology, identify potential preventive and Tx strategies and to further encourage research in this area., Methods: Literature search on English language articles indexed to PubMed, CINALH, SCOPUS and Web of Science using MeSH terms "Lung neoplasms","Dysgeusia", "Olfaction Disorders", "Carcinoma, Small Cell","Carcinoma, Non- Small-Cell Lung "Adenocarcinoma of Lung","Carcinoma, Large Cell", and non-MeSH terms "Parageusia", "Altered Taste", "Smell Disorder", "Paraosmia", "Dysosmia","Lung Cancer" and "Oat Cell Carcinoma"., Results: Thirty-four articles were reviewed. TSAs may follow the diagnosis of LC or develop during cancer Tx. The estimated prevalence of self-reported dysgeusia is 35-38% in treatment-naïve LC patients, and 35-69% in those undergoing Tx, based on studies involving LC patients only.One prospective pilot trial and 1 RCT demonstrated a clinically significant benefit in combining flavor enhancement, smell and taste training and individualized nutritional counselling; a systematic review, 1 RCT and 1 retrospective study favored using intravenous or oral zinc-based solutions (150mg 2-3 times a day) for the prevention and Tx of chemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT) -induced mucositis and subsequent dysgeusia., Conclusions: This is the first review on dysgeusia and dysosmia in LC patients to our knowledge. We propose combining taste and smell training, personalized dietary counselling and flavor enhancement with oral zinc-based solutions (150mg, 2-3 times a day) during CT and/or RT in this population, in order to prevent and help ameliorate Tx-induced dysgeusia and mucositis. However due to study heterogeneity, the results should be interpreted with caution. Developing standardized TSA measurement tools and performing prospective randomized controlled trials to evaluate their effect are warranted., Competing Interests: Author FP was employed by company BlueClinical. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Spencer, da Silva Dias, Capelas, Pimentel, Santos, Neves, Mäkitie and Ravasco.)

Introduction: Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients show a high risk of malnutrition due to the lifestyle habits adopted prior to the diagnosis as well as to the compromising impact of both the anatomical location of the tumor and the treatment modalities on food intake. Weight change, measurement of skinfold thickness, biochemical parameters, bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MRI), or dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) are available techniques to evaluate nutritional status and/or body composition in the clinical practice. Evaluating body composition alterations in HNC patients is essential to be able to offer the best therapeutical interventions. In this paper, we review the existing literature regarding body composition evaluation in HNC patients to determine, which is the most suitable method for this population, regarding availability in the day-to-day practice, patient burden, cost, sensibility, and specificity. Methodology: A literature search for relevant papers indexed in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Scielo was conducted, with no publication date restriction and for all published articles until the 31 January, 2019. All the papers written in English, with interventions in humans, exclusively considering HNC patients were selected. Results: A total of 41 studies with different methodologies were included in this review. In 15 studies BIA was the used assessment method and three of them also evaluated skinfold thickness and one was a bioelectric impedance vector analysis (BIVA). Body composition assessment was made with DXA in eight studies, one of which also included muscle biopsies. In two studies the chosen method was both BIA and DXA. CT/ positron emission tomography-CT was applied in 11 studies and one also included MRI. In two studies body composition was assessed with skinfold measurements alone and one study only used BIVA. Conclusions: Despite the different existing body composition assessment tools, it seems that skeletal muscle mass (SMM) measurement at the level of cervical spine C3 vertebra may be a reliable method for SMM assessment as it strongly correlates with cross-sectional area measures at the level of L3 and it allows a cost-effective body composition assessment without the need for additional radiation exposure., (Copyright © 2019 Almada-Correia, Neves, Mäkitie and Ravasco.)