This opinion paper presents a short review of the potential impact of protein on muscle anabolism in cancer, which is associated with better patient outcomes. Protein source is a topic of interest for patients and clinicians, partly due to recent emphasis on the supposed non-beneficial effect of proteins; therefore, misconceptions involving animal-based (e.g., meat, fish, dairy) and plant-based (e.g., legumes) proteins in cancer are acknowledged and addressed. Although the optimal dietary amino acid composition to support muscle health in cancer is yet to be established, animal-based proteins have a composition that offers superior anabolic potential, compared to plant-derived proteins. Thus, animal-based foods should represent the majority (i.e., !65%) of protein intake during active cancer treatment. A diet rich in plantderived proteins may support muscle anabolism in cancer, albeit requiring a larger quantity of protein to fulfill the optimal amino acid intake. We caution that translating dietary recommendations for cancer prevention to cancer treatment may be inadequate to support the pro-inflammatory and catabolic nature of the disease. We further caution against initiating an exclusively plant-based (i.e., vegan) diet upon a diagnosis of cancer, given the presence of elevated protein requirements and risk of inadequate protein intake to support muscle anabolism. Amino acid combination and the long-term sustainability of a dietary pattern void of animal-based foods requires careful and laborious management of protein intake for patients with cancer. Ultimately, a dietary amino acid composition that promotes muscle anabolism is optimally obtained through combination of animal-and plant-based protein sources.

No abstract

Preoperative nutrition status is an important determinant of surgical outcomes, yet malnutrition assessment is not integrated into all surgical pathways. Given its importance and the high prevalence of malnutrition in patients undergoing surgical procedures, preoperative nutrition screening, assessment, and intervention are needed to improve postoperative outcomes. This narrative review discusses novel methods to assess malnutrition and frailty in the surgical patient. The Global Leadership Initiative for Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria are increasingly used in surgical settings although further spread and implementation are strongly encouraged to help standardize the diagnosis of malnutrition. The use of body composition (ie, reduced muscle mass) as a phenotypic criterion in GLIM may lead to a greater number of patients identified as having malnutrition, which may otherwise be undetected if screened by other diagnostic tools. Skeletal muscle loss is a defining criterion of malnutrition and frailty. Novel direct and indirect approaches to assess muscle mass in clinical settings may facilitate the identification of patients with or at risk for malnutrition. Selected imaging techniques have the additional advantage of identifying myosteatosis (an independent predictor of morbidity and mortality for surgical patients). Feasible pathways for screening and assessing frailty exist and may determine the cost/benefit of surgery, long‐term independence and productivity, and the value of undertaking targeted interventions. Finally, the evaluation of nutrition risk and status is essential to predict and mitigate surgical outcomes. Nascent to novel approaches are the future of objectively identifying patients at perioperative nutrition risk and guiding therapy toward optimal perioperative standards of care.

Individuals who take medications may benefit from using vitamin and/or mineral supplements (VMS) yet excess supplementation can lead to overuse (daily intake exceeding the tolerable upper intake level (UL)). This study assessed VMS use of medically complex, community-living, older adults. A chart review of 229 patients ≥50 years with new medication assessments between 2014 and 2017 indicated that 76.9% of patients used ≥1 VMS daily. The UL for one or more nutrients was exceeded by 39.8% of supplement users.

No abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of telephone-based delivery of weekday-only time-restricted eating (TRE), its preliminary efficacy for metabolic outcomes, and concurrent lifestyle changes.Methods: Twenty-two breast cancer survivors aged 60+ years with overweight/obesity completed an 8-week feasibility study of 12 to 8 PM weekday-only ad libitum TRE. The intervention was delivered by one registered dietitian call, twice-daily automated text messages asking about eating start and stop times, and three support phone calls. Magnetic resonance imaging, venipuncture, and 3 days of diet records and accelerometry were performed at baseline and after intervention.Results: Participants had a mean age of 66 (SD 5) years with BMI of 31.8 (4.8) kg/m 2 .Intervention implementation was successful, including excellent adherence (98%), participant acceptability, and a low symptom profile and cost ($63/participant). There were no significant changes in individual components of metabolic syndrome, lipid profile, or hemoglobin A 1c , despite clinically relevant changes occurring within individual participants. Magnetic resonance imaging-derived hepatic steatosis and thigh myosteatosis did not change. Dietary intake changes included reduced energy (À22%) and protein (À0.2 g/kg). Physical activity and sleep did not change.Conclusions: Eight weeks of telephone-delivered weekday TRE is a feasible, acceptable, low-symptom, and low-cost intervention. Future studies may consider a longer intervention length for more consistent metabolic improvements and counseling to enhance protein intake.

Vitamin and mineral supplements can assist a person in meeting recommended intakes but excessive use can pose risks. Knowing prevalence of supplement use is the first step toward gauging risk-benefit. This scoping review sought to determine the prevalence of vitamin and mineral supplement use among community-dwelling Canadian and American adults. Medline and Embase were searched using keywords and MeSH headings that encapsulated both vitamin and mineral supplements and community-dwelling adults in Canada and the United States. Search limits were set for study participants over the age of 18, English language articles, and a publication date from the year 2000 to June of 2016. Of the 181 articles originally identified, 30 were deemed relevant for this scoping review. Eleven studies reported on vitamin and mineral supplement use in general, without specifying the prevalence of use for any particular supplement(s). Prevalence of general vitamin and mineral supplement use reported in these studies ranged from 7-85%. Twenty-two studies reported the prevalence of consumption for specific vitamins and minerals; although three of these studies also reported on overall supplement use. Calcium and vitamin D were widely reported, with 10 of 22 studies focusing on these key nutrients. Multivitamin/mineral supplements were also widely studied with 8 of 22 articles reporting their prevalence of consumption. Results from this scoping review indicate that data on the quantity and combination of supplement use is lacking in Canada and United States. These data are key for identifying intake amounts and combinations that have the potential to cause adverse effects.

Background: Severe muscle mass (MM) loss is a defining feature of cancer observed across all types and stages of disease and is an independent predictor of poor clinical outcomes including higher incidences of chemotherapy toxicity and decreased survival. Protein is essential to build MM, yet the optimal amount for preventing or treating muscle loss in patients with cancer remains undefined. Methods: The Protein Recommendation to Increase Muscle (PRIMe) study is a single-center, two-armed, parallel, randomized, controlled pilot trial that assesses the feasibility of utilizing a high protein (HP) diet to positively impact clinical outcomes in people undergoing chemotherapy to treat colorectal cancer. Forty patients with newly diagnosed stage II-IV colorectal cancer who are scheduled to receive chemotherapy will be included. Participants are randomly assigned to a HP or normal protein (NP) diet for twelve weeks. The HP and NP groups receive nutrition recommendations to achieve 2.0 g of protein per kilogram of body weight per day (g•kg À1 •d À1 ) and 1.0 g,kg À1 ,d À1 , respectively. These values refer to the upper and lower recommended range of protein intake for people with cancer. Energy recommendations are based on measured energy expenditure. Assessments are completed within two weeks of starting chemotherapy (baseline), at week 6, and at week 12. Changes to skeletal MM, physical function, anthropometrics, body composition, muscle strength, physical activity, energy metabolism, metabolic markers, nutritional status, quality of life, readiness to change and psychosocial determinants of behavioural change are assessed between the HP and NP groups. Feasibility of the nutritional intervention is assessed by change in MM as a surrogate marker. Conclusions: This evidence-based study investigates the feasibility of increasing protein intake following a diagnosis of cancer on clinical outcomes during treatment for colorectal cancer. This study will inform larger trials assessing the impact of increasing protein intake in cancer to determine their importance and integration into standard clinical care for people with cancer.